Description - it would be nice to be able to add more than 4000 characters to the Description field when pushing an email from Outlook to Workfront using the add-on / plugin. Why is this feature important to you - many emails are longer than the 4,000 character limit, and sometimes the context within the email is still valuable and a user wants to keep it in the issue's history.How would you like the feature to work - remove the character limit. Alternately, instead of having the body of the email auto-load into the Description, it could be auto-loaded into an Updates field if that doesn't have a character limit.Current Behaviour - an error message pops up if Description is >4000 characters, and the Issue cannot be loaded to Workfront.
DescriptionExisting batch (SFTP, S3 and others file processing) source connections allow data ingestion into AEP based on an individual file or at a folder level. In the Select Data step, currently there is no provision of providing a file name format specification that we want to process into AEP. When there are multiple differently named files in one folder in SFTP/S3 location and we want to ingest these files into different datasets, there need to be a way to select matching file name (for example file_1* to file_1 dataset and file_2* to file_2 dataset etc) from the same location in the UI. Why is this feature important to youAbility to select multiple files confirming a file name format will give us a flexibility to ingest multiple files from same location instead of creating separate locations for each file. How would you like the feature to workAlong with the current functionality, there should be a Text box to select the file name format allowing wild cards to select multiple files from the same location. Current BehaviorThe existing capability limits to ingest at an individual file or folder level in the UI from same location.
In Adobe reports you are able to run previous page and next page reports which is very handy. In Workspace you are able to see similar data using the flow analysis. An improvement on both of these, IMO, would be to have a 'Previous Page' and 'Next Page' dimensions that you could drag and drop on visualizations all within Analysis Workspace.
Description - I am currently trying to find some solutions to be able to set up certain user rights in much more detail than currently seems possible or intended.In the course of this, the way in which the inheritance of rights works hierarchically with shared objects constantly presents us with new challenges. Why is this feature important to you - We want to use portfolios as self-contained silos, so to speak. It would be necessary to be able to assign different rights within a portfolio in a convenient and understandable way. One problem with this is that if a user or a user group has already been given certain rights at a higher level, these are always inherited completely downwards via programs, portfolios, tasks, etc. and the inherited rights always override any additional, more restrictive rights.Inheritance cannot currently be deactivated via the API. Although there is an unofficial workaround that can also be implemented in Fusion, the complexity leads to quite complex and therefore error-prone Fusion scenarios. In addition, there are simply too many different places in the system where access rights are set (Sharing settings on objects, access levels, templates, ...). All of this means that a lot of trial and error with many errors is necessary in order to implement certain requirements or to recognise that something is not possible. I would like to give you an example to illustrate this. We would like to restrict a specific user group to be able to only download documents from a specific folder on a task and if accessing other folders to see the documents, but not being able to download those. If the user group has access to the parent project, the users have download access to all files due to inheritance, regardless of which folder they are in.Setting up an additional sharing right on a folder to restrict the download possibility for this group is ignored because of the inheritance from the parent projekt / task.So it would be necessary to turn of inheritance here. I would prefer it to be possible to overrule inherited rights. Looking into the Access Levels, there is a possible additional restriction to Never inherit document access from projects, tasks, requests, etc...Nice approach, but that means, that the access rights need to be set for any document. A rule on a folder is completely ignored for the containing documents. Apart from the fact that it took and still takes me a lot of time to find out and understand these peculiarities of the system, you may come across other challenges in other places.Maintenance and ensuring that users are really only allowed to do what they are supposed to do is also a very difficult task at the moment. How would you like the feature to work - more detailed and granular way to setup user rights to have a much more flexible application Current Behaviour - as described above.
Description - We are trying to provide a dev environment for users where they can develop the workflow templates and then once it is complete we can export. We will then import the working template into production environment for the user. Why is this feature important to you - Creating the templates directly in the production does not seem to the right action. The user will have to be given Administrator rights for the workflow template feature How would you like the feature to work - Export and Import feature for Workflow template in Proof HQ. Current Behavior - Currently what is expected is the user uses Preview Proof HQ to test his workflow template and then goes and recreates the whole template again in Prod Proof HQ which is not efficient
Description - We are trying to move away from the legacy S3 configuration to the newer option, where you can use an IAM role for Adobe to assume when delivering S3 files. This reduces the amount of maintenance from our end in supporting access keys/secret keys. However, it seems like when configuring export locations, those can only be seen by the creator. As a team with multiple users using the UI, it'd be nice for everyone to have access to the same info.Why is this feature important to you - It'd allow us to easily reconfigure our feeds via this methodHow would you like the feature to work - See everyone (or at least everyone within our group)'s export locations when configuring or changing feeds.Current Behaviour - This is only exposed at a user level
It would be helpful to have a checklist feature in Workfront Proof on which we could list each user or department's review responsibilities when reviewing a proof. For example, we typically have several users (from different departments) looking at the same proof, and each one is responsible for reviewing different areas or details. Having a checklist as a reminder of things to look for would be helpful. We have tried using the current pop-up message when a proof is opened or when a decision is made as a reminder notification. That, however, is not great because there was so much text for each department's review responsibilities, and it was only viewable before opening and before closing the proof, but could not be referenced simultaneously when reviewing the file. What we are looking for is a more integrated checklist that could be viewed while reviewing. If separate sections could be toggled or filtered that would be great (e.g. separate sections for each department, so only the one relevant to the user would be visible).
Is it possible to enable RTE for the comment? The business demand is having the ability to highlight the texts.
When a requestor fills out my form, they choose the Start date (which defaults to today's date). Then they choose the End date (which also defaults to today's date). Is there a way (maybe in Text Mode?) that we can make the second field (End date) defaulted to select the previously entered Start date value, since the End date should always come after the Start date?I'm always trying to reduce form clicks for my team. Requestors are noticing the behavior when entering numerous issues with the same form, specifically when using Start and End date fields in tasks and issues (also with default Calendar month at load-in). It takes extra time to select the End date, and is very obvious when flow is repeated numerous times. Maybe when a date field is added following after another date field, or, maybe when two date fields are set side-by-side (same line), then the second (End) date would allow the user to reference the first (Start) date. You could use the "Add Logic" menu and UI to reference the first form, with a function drop down with the option/value to "reference start date". That would be very cool. Right now, even if you select a Start date of Jan 1, 2035, the End date field will always default back to today's date, causing you to have to click a lot to get back to the year 2035, just to select the next day for the End date, resulting in double the amount of clicks for each issue created. Thanks!
Description - We have fusion users who create fusion scenarios, but are not acting as system admins within Workfront. To create fusion scenarios, users must be given the access level of System Admin. For example we have users within our Corporate IT team who are experts in Jira. They create fusion scenarios that link Workfront into Jira, but their expertise in within Jira. They take training on how to work in Fusion, but their focus is not on being a Workfront system admin. They own, document, update their fusion scenarios.Why is this feature important to you - We have users in Fusion who show as System Admins, when in reality they are not system admins. They only author and maintain fusion scenarios. We would like them to be assigned a newly created access level to denote that they are Fusion only users. We don't want or need them to be viewed as system admins, because in reality they are notHow would you like the feature to work - We would Adobe to develop an access level that allows users to interact between Workfront and Fusion, but not give them System Admin access level. Would it be possible for a fusion person to only be required to have group admin access level?Current Behavior - Our Workfront instance gives the appearance of having System Admins, who don't act as system admins, and we don't expect them to act as System Admins. We need visibility on who is a "fusion only user". Yes, I know we could create a job role or team, but the reality is we don't want these users to have the same access levels and permission as a System Admin. All feedback is welcomed.
I'd like to suggest the ability to create custom tracking links in Marketo for referencing who (known and unknown visitors) clicked on a given link (i.e. one possibly attached to a QR code at a tradeshow or used for a banner ad on an online advertisement). This would provide necessary visibility into the effectiveness of specific marketing channels and provide additional insight into which leads are engaging with a given piece of content from one place. Pardot/AE provides this capability as a custom redirect. I think Marketo should provide this same sort of functionality.
When I got to work this morning, I was met with messages from several users very excited about our new Adobe Creative Cloud rollout, wanting to know how they could get access to it. After some VERY confusing pre-caffeinated back and forth, they sent me the re-designed email notifications that Adobe started sending as of yesterday(?) that feature a giant advertising banner all about an integration between Creative Cloud and Workfront. This is not an integration project we are doing, nor is it a tool we plan to subscribe to for our users. I am not looking forward to repeating this to hundreds of people today. Making this gratuitous and unauthorized advertising initiative even worse, that link quite "helpfully" takes all of my end-users to installation instructions they'll never be able to complete. While I do like the much cleaner email notification layout, leveraging it to spam my users with product ads while making it appear to come from me as an internal initiative is not acceptable. Requested Fix: Remove the advertising banner from all email notification templates being sent to Workfront instance users.
Description - Allow a user to immediately add board tags to a task/issue they are connecting to a board from a project.Why is this feature important to you - Would save a lot of steps and timeHow would you like the feature to work - When you are on a Project, select a task or issue, click to add to a board, select the board name, then get the option to add the Tags (from that board) onto that connected card right away.Current Behaviour - After you manually add a task/connected card to a board, you then have to navigate over to the Board, unfilter by tag, search for the task you just added, open task/connected card, add a tag, close, reset your tag filters. A LOT of steps
When creating a Project and Task there should be a more robust feature for creating the description. Wrike has this ability and it's amazing. A lot of times, a project's description reaches far beyond plain text and custom form fields. How most people at our company communicate is through email, and although email is a complete mess, what email is good at is allowing the person to format a message and description is multiple ways: through documents, screenshots, HTML text formatting (BOLD, underline, strikebreaking, bullet points, numbering, indenting, tables, charts, font colors, etc). Most project and tasks have supporting information in the form of images and charts, and there isn't a way currently in WF to communicate this within the system. We now have to go outside the system and go back to emailing or using other project management tools. Workfront has a lot of amazing features, but I feel as though you have to think back to the basis of a project management tool - and this tool should focus on the easy communication of project and task creation. This could also be applied to requests and documents as well, but not as important as projects and tasks.The creation of a task should be a bit simpler and less cluttered. Workfront has so many options and features, which is fantastic, but it can be completely overwhelming for users who are not necessarily tech savvy and just want to use the system for creating a task, description, dependencies, assignee, and due date. This information should be at the forefront of the design and the rest of the functionality can be shown differently. And custom form fields should really be considered part of the projects description and be within that same area. Right now it's not very intuitive where to get necessary details about the project in order to do someone's job. The user needs to go to project details, look at the main overall timeline details then click custom form to get the actual full description of the project.
Include 'Actual Hours' column in both the 'View by Role' and 'View by Project' views of the Resource Planner. This would show how much time was actually spent on each role or project, in addition to the other metrics like Available, Planned, Budgets, etc (as shown below). At least gives this as an option in the settings.
Currently in order for a user to view Views on their Home Workspace Tasks widget, they have to have Create access to Views. As a System Administrator I don't want users to be able to Create their own Views but would like for them to have access to manage a View on their Home Workspace. Would like for users to have access to Views if they have view access to Views.
Currently, a project can't be changed to Complete status until all tasks are complete and all issues are closed. It would be helpful if all proofs were required to be closed before the status can be changed to Complete. The system will remain much cleaner if all parts of the project are closed. This could be a manual change to the proof status, or ideally, the system could close the proof automatically when the project status is changed to Complete.
Description - Currently, only one project owner can be assigned to a project. It would be great to have the ability to assign more than one individual as the project owner. Why is this feature important to you - There are use cases in which more than one project owner would be useful. For example, if two project managers are collaborating on one project. Or, if a colleague is on vacation, you could temporarily be added as a project owner while they are out, so that the project appears in your project list, etc., but not removing your colleague so that it is still on their radar when they return. With a high volume of projects, this would be one less thing to think about. How would you like the feature to work - Just like other fields where multiple individuals can be assigned.Current Behaviour - Only one individual can be assigned as a project owner.
Would love to see Marketo add temporary email domains (e.g., mailinator.com) to the consumer email domain blocking list for form validation. OR, alternatively, allow users to add more domains to block for their own instance. Currently you're not able to add to the existing consumer email domain blocking list, nor are you able to create an additional rule to block additional domains because the system does not allow two validation rules that reference the same field.
Description - Allow analysts to apply a "Configurable Object" to multiple panels in a workspace report (such as Quick Insights, next/previous etc) that will allow a report to become a template that other stakeholders can easily use on the fly. This will allow users to just define their page or dimensional item of interest one time and that would then change all panels that are using this "configurable object". Why is this feature important to you - speed and adoption of reporting templates. Ease of use for newer users. How would you like the feature to work - Allow analysts to apply a "Configurable Object" to multiple panels in a workspace report (such as Quick Insights, next/previous etc) that will allow a report to become a template that other stakeholders can easily use on the fly. This will allow users to just define their page or dimensional item of interest one time and that would then change all panels that are using this "configurable object". Current Behaviour - you need to define your dimensional item (ex: page) manually per panel in the report.
Description - Ability to clean up batches which have been ingested into the datalake. Why is this feature important to you - This feature is important to clean up batches which have been ingested into the the AEP datalake which may no longer be relevant. How would you like the feature to work - Ability to delete batches ingested into the datalake based upon dataset or based upon timestamp. The job would delete batches from the datalake. This would be to clean up record data which is no longer on profile and TTL datasets which have gone past their profile TTL. Current Behaviour - Current behavior does not exist in the Adobe Experience Platform framework
Description - Currently it's possible to create review proofs with .XLSX but not .XLSMWhy is this feature important to you - We would use the review feature for files that are .XLSMHow would you like the feature to work - Exactly the same as the proofing feature.Current Behaviour - The proof fails to generate. Thank you !
Description - In CJA, there's a function called Split to split a value from a field into a new derived field, and the output can be an array. Would like to have a function which is like a reverse-split i.e. to take a array field and join them back with a delimiter to become a string field.Why is this feature important to you - To support reporting of a combinations of items as a bundle of items.How would you like the feature to work - A new drived field function or enhance the current Concatenate function to take an array field as input with a delimiter.Current Behaviour - Currently there's no such feature. Details please refer to the below link, https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/adobe-experience-platform/cja-multi-values-concatenated-in-a-field-lookup-challenge/m-p/676279#M4663
Can you please add a search feature to the reports page in Workfront? We have hundreds of reports, and it is frustrating to have to scroll to find the one you are looking for. The dashboards page has a search option, but not the reports page. Thanks!
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
