Build better products with our product team
Description:When you create a checkbox group in a custom form, an 'All' option is added when the form is displayed to your users. There is no way (that I know of) to disable this option. It also doesn't appear in the form editor, so it was a surprise to see it on the published form. There are cases where I don't want to encourage the user to select all options, and by putting 'All' first in the list, Workfront is making it look like that's what I want people to select.You should give us the option to disable the 'All' option for checkbox groups. Why is this feature important to you:The current implementation encourages users to select all available options, which is not what we want. We can get around this by making each item it's own checkbox, but this is very messy. How would you like the feature to work:In the options for the 'checkbox group' field, have an option to 'Disable 'All' option'.Current Behaviour:'All' option is added at the top of all checkbox groups when custom forms are displayed to the user when making a new request.
We relly heavily in Proofing and the proofing custom form.We have multiple automated templates and fields that we capture. When we need to add new proofing fields, automated templates or make updates or changes to existing ones, having only Preview to test and demo those changes makes it very difficult for us as one week is not enough time to have demo and uat for all the required stakeholders.Some of our automated templates can have up to 20 stages so recreating this every week in Preview is very cumbersome and inefficient. We would like to have Proofing available in the Sandbox environments.
Description - In my role, I often create projects, leave them in Planning and then mark as Complete just so there's a record, but I also, do the normal project workflow of Planning, Current, and Complete. It would be helpful if there was an option to prevent email notifications from being sent on a specific project, i.e., the ones that go from Planning to Complete. Why is this feature important to you - It would prevent an emails being sent where there are no tasks for anyone and it's not necessary to know the project is Complete since it was for documentation purposes only. How would you like the feature to work - When a Project goes from Planning to Complete, have a popup that asks "Should email notifications to be sent?" Have checkboxes for Yes or No. Current Behaviour - Email notifications can be changed under User Settings or Globally which we wouldn't want to change because they would be changed on all projects. Thanks,Kenny
From an enterprise management perspective, controlling and regulating custom form updates and simply the identification becomes very difficult due to limited ability to identify who owns a certain form. Currently, the only way to really differentiate the different forms between groups is by adding in an abbreviated identifier in the name of the form or description such as "ABC Group - Intake Request" (both are a not optimal). There does not appear to be a way to even change the group name that is associated with the forms today which at the very least would be extremely helpful. Request: Add in some simple identification features within custom forms such as an Owner and/or customizable Group identifier Benefits: Ability to filter custom forms based on ownership which creates administrative efficiency and reduces risk of incorrect form updatesIncreases user experience by not having to have group identifiers within the name of the form (more aesthetic to user) Experience the same challenge? Add a thumbs up "like" to this idea!
Description - Remember my Phone Number and Time ZoneWhy is this feature important to you - So I don't have to enter it every time. How would you like the feature to work - Prepopulate from my account. Current Behaviour - I have to enter it every time. While it's easy to enter my phone number, I have to scroll through to find my time zone which is already selected on my account settings. Having it prepopulate with the information will reduce errors and speed up the process. Thanks
Description -Currently, when printing or exporting a dashboard from the platform, color formatting (such as conditional formatting, status indicators) is not retained in the final output. This can make printed reports harder to interpret, especially when visual cues are critical for understanding project or task status. The exported version often appears in grayscale or with muted visuals, even when the dashboard is fully colored on-screen.While we understand some UI-specific elements are removed by design, color is a critical aspect of dashboard readability. Request -We would like to request the ability for printed and exported dashboards to retain their original color formatting. This includes conditional formatting (e.g., status indicators), and any other meaningful color-based visual cues. Ensuring color consistency between the on-screen view and the printed/exported version would improve clarity and data interpretation.Why is this feature important to you - Prevents misinterpretation of status or performance data that relies on color codingImproves the professionalism and readability of exported reportsReduces the need for manual workarounds or explanations about what colors were “supposed to be”
Description - CJA/Derived Fields: Internal URL Filter for Marketing Channels, new feature requestWhy is this feature important to you - I'm setting up our Marketing Channels on CJA using Derived Fields, as part of our migration from Adobe Analytics to CJA. While in the process, I noticed that there is no option to set up Internal URL Filter in the derived fields. We have many internal sites in the company, and we need to be able to categorize them as "internal traffic" in our marketing channels, so that it doesn't mess up our marketing channels reporting.How would you like the feature to work - exactly as it is currently working in Adobe Analytics: the possibility to add internal URLs, and to later use them in the marketing channels processing rule builder (screenshots attached). Current Behaviour - there is currently no behavior on the derived fields.
DescriptionImprove Timesheet Behavior for Manually Pinned TasksWhy is this feature important to youCurrently, manually pinned tasks remain on a user's timesheet even after being marked as Completed or Cancelled. This can lead to confusion, as users may continue logging hours on tasks that are no longer active. It also affects data accuracy and time tracking consistency.How would you like the feature to workWe suggest enhancing the timesheet functionality to better handle manually pinned tasks by:Automatically removing pinned tasks from the timesheet once they are marked as Completed or CancelledPreventing time entry on tasks that are no longer active, regardless of manual pinningIntroducing configuration options to restrict manual pinning based on task statusAllowing system administrators to disable the manual pinning feature (Alt+P) for specific user profiles or globallyCurrent BehaviourUsers can manually pin tasks to their timesheet using Alt+P or the pin iconPinned tasks remain visible on the timesheet even after being marked as Completed or CancelledUsers can continue logging hours on these tasksThe existing setting “Pre-populate timesheets with completed or cancelled tasks” does not affect manually pinned tasks
Description:Our users need a way to categorize comments in proofs. Reviews often include duplicate or similar feedback, and grouping them would make it easier to compare related or conflicting comments and speed up implementing edits. Why is this feature important to you:Grouping similar comments would save time, keep reviews organized, and improve accuracy when resolving conflicts. How would you like the feature to work:Allow users to tag or categorize comments (e.g., “Duplicate,” “Design Change,” “Content Edit”) and filter by those tags. This would let them view all related feedback together for faster, more organized reviews. Current Behaviour:Comments can only be reviewed individually.
Description - Currently, when printing a dashboard directly from the platform, the print view does not automatically adjust to align properly. Although manual adjustments are available on our end to ensure proper alignment in the print preview, the process is not dynamic and requires user intervention.Request: We would like to request the ability for the print view of dashboards to dynamically adjust to ensure proper alignment, without requiring any manual adjustments from the user. This would provide a smoother, more seamless experience for users who frequently print dashboards and improve overall usability. Why is this feature important to you - Eliminates the need for manual intervention each time a dashboard is printed.Enhances user experience by ensuring that all elements on the dashboard are properly aligned in the print preview, making it more efficient for users.Streamlines the process for those who rely on printed reports for presentations or documentation.
Description:There is a critical inconsistency between the activity records in the Adobe Admin Console and the logs shown in Workfront. When users make changes — such as editing profiles or managing access — via the Admin Console, these actions are not properly attributed in Workfront logs.Why is this feature important to you:Accurate traceability is essential for our security, audit, and compliance processes. Without clear identification of the user who performed a change, we face risks in governance and accountability. This is especially critical during permission reviews, account deactivations, or investigations.How would you like the feature to work:Workfront should reflect the actual user who performed the action in the Admin Console, both in the system logs and in Journal reports. Instead of showing “System” or generic labels, the logs should capture and display the authenticated user responsible for the change.Current Behaviour:Changes made in the Admin Console appear in Workfront logs as performed by “System” and in Journal reports as “RPA ” without any link to the actual user. This makes it impossible to track who made the change, creating gaps in auditability and compliance.
Description - Support WebP image file format for document upload and sharing (Not needed for proofing purposes) Why is this feature important to you - My team manages our corporate websites - those sites primarily use WebP file formatted images for page load speed and other reasons as supported by industry best practices. As an enterprise we use Workfront for request and project intake - so someone from another group within the enterprise can send a Workfront request to my team to update/create a web page - this included updating images - those individuals need to have the ability to upload and share WebP files with my team via Workfront for us to load to our DAM and websites. We would not need the ability to create WF proofs of these images. How would you like the feature to work - simply upload WebP file formatted images to documents within Projects and/or intake requests - again, for sharing purposes, not needed for proofing. Current Behavior - WebP images not supported for uploading.
Description - Any validation possibilites for entered values into custom fields would be great. Why is this feature important to you - At the moment there is no possibility to validate any entered values into fields. We cannot validate, if e.g. a valid email address, or url was entered, also for date fields it is not possible to define, e.g. that the allowed choices have to be after a specific date,... How would you like the feature to work - RegEx would be fine Current Behaviour - no validation
Including "Email from Name" as an Email attribute in Advanced BI analytics would so so useful for auditing From name usage in emails.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: This idea proposes enhancing Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) by shifting the storage of display settings within Sites and DAM sections from browser cookies to an instance-level configuration. By managing display preferences (such as UI layouts or viewing modes) directly within the AEM instance, users can enjoy a consistent experience across devices and browsers without relying on client-side storage. This approach improves usability, eliminates cookie dependency, enhances security, and ensures compliance with stricter data privacy regulations. Use-case: Use Case: Unified Display Settings for Multi-Device Content Editors Scenario:A content author frequently switches between a desktop computer at work and a laptop at home to edit content in AEM. Currently, their preferred display settings—such as column view—are stored in browser cookies. This leads to an inconsistent user experience, as their preferences need to be manually reconfigured on each browser and device. Solution with Instance-Level Settings:By saving display preferences at the AEM instance level, the author’s settings are automatically applied regardless of the browser or device they use. The system retrieves their settings directly from the instance during login, ensuring a seamless and personalized experience. Benefits: Consistency: The same display settings persist across all devices and browsers. Efficiency: Eliminates the need for users to reset or reconfigure preferences. Privacy & Compliance: Reduces reliance on cookies, aligning with stricter privacy laws like GDPR. Usability: Provides a more polished and user-friendly experience for content authors and administrators. Current/Experienced Behavior: In AEM, display settings for users are typically managed on a per-browser basis using cookies or local storage. This cookie-based approach is functional but lacks flexibility and scalability for modern multi-device workflows and collaborative environments, making a server-side, instance-level storage mechanism a desirable enhancement. Improved/Expected Behavior: The expected behavior involves transitioning from a browser-dependent model to an instance-level storage model for display settings. This approach ensures a consistent, user-friendly experience across devices, browsers, and shared environments. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud service (All environments), Release: 2024.11.18598.20241113T125352Z Customer-name/Organization name: BORUSSIA DORTMUND GMBH AND CO Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
We should be able to reference custom fields associated to a Typeahead object through Calculated Custom Fields and Calculated Columns.valuefield=[Typeahead Field Name]:[Custom Field]Ex. My organization uses a User Custom Form to track employee details such as 'Department' or 'Employee Number'. When a request is submitted on behalf of another employee we would like to use the Typeahead field to identify the employee and then have a set of calculated custom fields to 'auto fill' in the rest of the employee details.
We have roughly 7,500+ users on Workfront globally.In a small number of cases, where a user shares the same first name and last name, we are unable to distinguish which user is which when "@" tagging them into an update or other.It would be great if Workfront could either add an additional data point when tagging users in updates or add the user profile hover-over functionality to the draft update module to help determine if you are reaching the right person.Example below:Any questions, do let me know.Best regards,Christian
Description - We currently are using typeahead fields for single select employee lists on a custom form for Marketing and have a need to have an employee list with a multi-select optionWhy is this feature important to you - Since employee data lives in Workfront, it makes sense to be able to choose the appropriate information from Workfront instead of having to point to an external resourceHow would you like the feature to work - Would like the Typeahead field to be able to have both a single select and multi-select optionCurrent Behaviour - Typeahead field only allows a single select option
Description -We would like some groups to have the ability to see Data Views and their configuration without having the ability to modify. Current Behaviour - users without edit/modify permissions cannot see data views.
We have identified around 8K+ bogus domains which we would like to exclude from our Marketo Forms Submissions. However, there is a 2000 max limit of custom domains which can be added in the Global Forms Validation Rule and we are not able to restrict all bogus domains we have identified for exclusion.It would be ideal to have the limit of 2K max domains removed so each Marketo customer can add their own list in the Global Forms Validation Rule. Or if not possible, another option would be to provide the list of bogus domains in a .csv file to the Support team and they to support us with updating the default list which is provided by Marketo in the Global Forms Validation Rule.
Description - Implementing the Analytics CNAME involves creating a subdomain for our website, which is then utilized to place cookies in a first-party context. However, during SEO crawling, these subdomains are scanned as well. To prevent Google from crawling these subdomains, we need to make adjustments to the robots.txt file located within it. Yet, as end users, we lack the capability to perform this task on our own and require assistance from Analytics Engineering to handle it on our behalf Why is this feature important to you -Search engines like Google allocate a crawl quota to domains, determining the time and resources dedicated to indexing a website. If these crawlers expend their resources on redundant URLs, like CNAME subdomains, there's a potential for vital content on our site to go unnoticed during indexing. This poses a risk of missing out on organic traffic if the crawlers neglect new or updated content while focusing on less crucial areas. How would you like the feature to work - We seek support from Product Engineering to facilitate updates to the robots.txt file. Current Behavior - Analytics Product Engineering currently does not provide support for changes in the robots.txt file. This results in significant financial losses due to expenses associated with SEO configurations and unnecessary utilization of our crawler quotas.
We are creating a photography brief in a custom form, and it would be helpful if each checkbox included the photo angle name along with a reference image
Description - In the Priorities module, we would like an option for the bars on the calendar view to span the duration of the task based on the planned start and planned completion dates? Why is this feature important to you - Allows users to see how busy they are each day on the calendar Current Behaviour -Currently, the bars only show based on single date; the planned completion date
We have a mismatch between the [Priority] field values when creating a project from an issue using a template. Use case: We have an issue with a high priority. When we convert it to a project, the new project has a medium priority. We want the project to reflect the original project's priority. The cause: The Project Template requires a [Priority] value. All projects created using that template will have that value, regardless of the original request's priority. Proposal: When creating projects using a template, the new project inherits the [Priority] value from the original request. (Or have the ability to leave the Template value blank, so people who want items with that template to always have the same priority can have that option too) Benefits: Workfront user does not have to manually change the project Priority to match.When creating projects, other Project fields inherit values from the original request. Having [Priority] inherit values would lead to a consistent user expectation.
Description - The Delegate feature should include all the options like assignments, access to campaigns, email notifications/updates,etc and should not only limit to approvals.Why is this feature important to you - We have set up assignments for group leads who if go on vacations, we have to manually change the assignments for that period to anyone who is covering up for them. Also when they are back, it needs to be assigned back to group leaders. This is done on routers on queu topics or through fusion scenarios in some cases where we need to update everytime. If this can be covered under delegations, it would be great.How would you like the feature to work - It should automatically pick any assignments/notifictaion/ownership of campaigns to be asisgned to the delegated user.Current Behaviour - It only works for approvals, not for assignments and updates and project ownership.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
