Product ideas | Community
Skip to main content

Ideas

Filter by idea status

10000+ Ideas

dmescia2
dmescia2Level 4

Can we have nested Namespaces in AEM?Investigating

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary:   Use-case: We have built a taxonomy in our AEM DAM based on custom fields for search, filtering and reporting. We are using a namespace to bucket all of these tags as a top level bucket. Under that we have built out the tag structure for the rest of our taxonomy. The first level of those tags is a category which pairs up to a custom field used for search. These tags are technically "buckets" as well. We would like to set these up as namespaces as well but have them be children of the overarching namespace for our organization? So the structure would look like this:organization-namespace:category:tag-level-1/tag-level-2 Current/Experienced Behavior: We have a namespace to bucket all of our custom tags as a top level bucket. Under that we have built out the tag structure for the rest of our taxonomy. However, the first level of those tags is a category which pairs up to a custom field used for search. Improved/Expected Behavior: We would like to set these up the second level "buckets" as namespaces as well but have them be children of the overarching namespace for our organization? It'll be so much cleaner if we can have all of our tags in one place at the top instead of spread out among 20 or 30 separate namespaces at the root level. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud most recent version Customer-name/Organization name: Enterprise Mobility Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Garima21Adobe Employee

Process for Sonar Rules Update in Cloud ManagerInvestigating

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Sonar ruleset significantly influence BMW's development workflows. To ensure smooth integration and minimal disruption, it is essential that any changes to these rules—including minor adjustments—are communicated in advance. Developer teams require early access to updated rule definitions so they can validate their code against them before the changes are enforced in Cloud Manager pipelines. Use-case: BMW experienced a situation where a previously successful pipeline began failing overnight due to newly detected Sonar vulnerabilities, despite being based on the same commit. This indicates that the Sonar ruleset had changed unexpectedly from one day to the next. Given BMW’s multi-project setup—comprising around 10 interdependent projects managed by different development teams—each project is built through its own pipeline. As a result, a Sonar scan failure in any one pipeline can have a significant ripple effect across the entire development landscape. Current/Experienced Behavior: A Sonar scan failure in any one pipeline can have a significant ripple effect across the entire development landscape. Improved/Expected Behavior: To ensure smooth integration and minimal disruption, it is essential that any changes to these rules—including minor adjustments—are communicated in advance. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS Customer-name/Organization name: BMW AG Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

dmescia2
dmescia2Level 4

Can we update the way folders and assets are handled in AEMInvestigating

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I would like to see more of a separation in how assets and folders are managed in AEM. They are both managed the same way in 2 separate spaces, the assets pane and teh content tree. I would like to see the content tree be the space for managing folders and the assets pane be the space to manage assets. Use-case: Admin users managing assets are creating a folder structure with multiple nested folders to keep things organized. In this use case we'll use brands and lines of business. We have assets that are are for a specific brand Current/Experienced Behavior: Admin users managing assets are creating a folder structure with multiple nested folders to keep things organized. There are folder based profiles added to those folders including tags that are applied to any assets added to those. We also created a workflow that will copy tags down from parent to child so those tags aren't overridden by subfolder tagging.   In this use case we'll use brands and lines of business. We have assets that are are for a specific brand. They are placed in the folder for that brand and the metadata from the folder based profile is applied. There are multiple lines of business that fall under that brand and there is a folder for each one of those in there as well with a folder based profile added and specific tags for those. Assets are added to those and the tags are automatically applied.    This workflow is working fine, however, it leaves us with folders living among a sea of assets. When navigating the DAM via folder structure it becomes very difficult to sift through when there are hundreds (sometimes thousands) of assets surrounding the folders. If I have to update permissions or profiles for specific folders its either confusing (scrolling) or clunky (filtering on folders) to find the folder. Improved/Expected Behavior: I would like to be able to manage all of my folders in the content tree space. Create folders, select and get info, add folder based metadata, etc. And I'd like to be able to manage my assets in the asset pane.Create assets, select and get info, add asset based metadata, etc. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): We are on the most current Assets as a Cloud Service environment. Customer-name/Organization name: Enterprise Mobility Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Improve launch promotion to include necessary page propertiesInvestigating

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: In Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), when promoting a Launch back to the source page, certain page properties—such as title, description, alias, and tags—are not being promoted as expected. This behavior appears to be a limitation (or bug) in the default roll out configuration and affects both customized and fresh AEM instances (e.g., 6.5.22 with We.Retail content). Use-case: A content author creates a Launch to prepare updates for a press release page. They modify several page properties in the Launch version, including metadata and visibility settings. Upon promoting the Launch, the content updates are applied, but many of the page properties revert or are lost—leading to inconsistencies and manual rework. Current/Experienced Behavior: Current Behavior Launch promotion excludes certain page properties due to default rollout configuration. The configuration at /libs/msm/launches/rolloutconfigs/launch/contentUpdate includes an exclusion rule: cq.wcm.msm.action.excludedprops = jcr:.* This rule prevents properties like jcr:title, jcr:description, cq:tags, and sling:alias from being promoted. Steps to Reproduce Create a new page (e.g., press-release-may.html). Create a Launch for the page using default settings. Modify page properties in the Launch version: Basic Tab: Title, Navigation Title, Description, Tag, Hide from Navigation. Advanced Tab: Alias, Article Date. Add basic content to the page. Promote the Launch using standard promotion steps. Observe the result: Navigation Title is promoted. Title, Description, Tag, and Alias are not promoted. Content updates are correctly applied. Improved/Expected Behavior: Page properties modified in the Launch should be fully promoted to the source page, including: Title Description Tags Alias Any other relevant metadata Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5.22 Adobe team a workaround to directly make changes in "libs," and be cautious about doing so and keeping track of the impact during service pack upgrades. After discussing with our internal technical team, /libs path must remain unchanged. Since Adobe proposed a solution that involves modifying the rollout configuration, we will look forward to enhancement fix for this issue. It will likely involve updating the location where the rollout config is applied to use the resolver (which prioritizes /apps over /libs) instead of relying on a hardcoded /libs path. Other references - E-001650598 / E-001772942   Customer-name/Organization name: Shell Screenshot (if applicable): attached for reference Code package (if applicable):  

abommaLevel 2

Word doc re upload option not updating sub assets folderInvestigating

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Word doc re upload option not updating sub assets folder Use-case: When we are changing/removing the images from the word doc and re upload with create version option then sub assets folder is not updating with latest images used in word document. Due to this there is mismatch in the images in word document and sub assets folder.This is a priority issue and we need to resolve on urgent. Could you please check and let us know on this issue.1. Navigate to Assets console, files option2. Upload a document with some images. update metadata.3. Change the images/remove one or two images in the word document.4. Upload word document with Create Version option5. Check the sub assets folder , observe mismatch with source word document . Current/Experienced Behavior: When we are changing/removing the images from the word doc and re upload with create version option then sub assets folder is not updating with latest images used in word document. Due to this there is mismatch in the images in word document and sub assets folder. 6.5.22, 6.5.20, and 6.5.18, and the behavior is consistent across all of them. Improved/Expected Behavior: When we are changing/removing the images from the word doc and re upload with create version option then sub assets folder is not updating with latest images used in word document. Due to this there is mismatch in the images in word document and sub assets folder.Sub assets folder need to be updated even with create version option . Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 SP20 6.5.22, 6.5.20, and 6.5.18, and the behavior is consistent across all of them. Customer-name/Organization name: CISCO Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

ZietasMiHNew Member

RTE support for <strong> and <em> tagsInvestigating

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: RTE support for <strong> and <em> tags Use-case: We are running an accessibility improvements project right now and our 3rd party a11y consultants reported some issues with they way RTE work.Right now RTE has an option to bolden a part of a text or to make it italic style. For that purpose it is using <b> and <i> standard HTML elements and this is perfectly fine. We have learnt that in some cases instead of these tags it is advisable to use <strong> or <em> tags as they also bring more context for a screen readers so that they can emphasise how to read that section of text.The <strong> tag is read by screen readers as an indication that the text enclosed within it carries strong importance. When a screen reader encounters a <strong> tag, it typically emphasizes the text, often by changing the tone or pitch of the voice, or by adding a pause before and after reading the text. This helps users who rely on assistive technologies understand that the content is significant or has a higher priority in the context of the surrounding text.Using <strong> instead of <b> not only provides visual emphasis but also enhances the semantic meaning of the content, improving accessibility for users with disabilities.We would love to have na option to define which tag is used for particular place in text. It should sometimes be simply <b> and in other cases we would love to have a choice to pick <strong>.There is no such functionality right now in RTE and I would like to ask if there is any active feature request for such functionality and if this could be planned to be developed. Current/Experienced Behavior: We can only place <b> and <i> tags in RTE  Improved/Expected Behavior: There should be a way to pick <b> or <strong> tag for selected text. There should be a way to pick <i> or <em> tag for selected text.  Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5.23  Customer-name/Organization name:   Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):  

Integrating Quantum Computing with Adobe TargetNew

DescriptionThe proposal is to integrate quantum computing capabilities into Adobe Target’s personalization and optimization workflows. Quantum computing enables processing of exponentially complex datasets and can solve optimization problems faster and more accurately than classical AI. By embedding quantum-inspired or quantum-hardware-accelerated models into Adobe Target, businesses can achieve ultra-precise personalization and superior optimization outcomes. Why is this feature important to youNext-level personalization: Today’s AI-driven personalization is powerful but constrained by classical computing limits. Quantum computing can unlock new levels of accuracy and context-awareness.Faster experimentation: Reduce time-to-confidence in A/B and multivariate testing, helping businesses act on insights faster.Competitive edge for Adobe: Adobe would become the first mover in merging marketing technology with quantum innovation, increasing adoption of Adobe Target.Revenue impact: Superior personalization drives higher conversions, customer engagement, and long-term loyalty, directly benefiting Adobe’s clients and Adobe itself. How would you like the feature to workIntegration Layer: Introduce a “Quantum Optimization” mode within Adobe Target, where certain algorithms (e.g., multi-arm bandits, constrained offer orchestration, journey optimization) can run using quantum-inspired solvers.Opt-in Pilot: Allow businesses to enable quantum acceleration as an experimental strategy for specific activities or recommendations.KPIs for Measurement:Accuracy lift in personalizationReduction in regret/time-to-confidence for testsConversion rate improvementsArchitecture Suggestion:Start with quantum-inspired algorithms on classical hardware (D-Wave, IBM Qiskit simulators, etc.)Provide extensibility to connect with actual quantum hardware backends in the future. Current BehaviourCurrently, Adobe Target relies on AI and machine learning models running on classical infrastructure for personalization, testing, and optimization. These models are effective but face computational limitations when handling:Very large audience segmentationHigh-dimensional testing with multiple offers and constraintsReal-time, privacy-safe personalization across billions of signalsQuantum acceleration does not exist in the current system, leaving unexplored potential for ultra-precise personalization.