Build better products with our product team
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Use-case: Editors need the possibility of moving folders and removing in case of making a mistake. Current/Experienced Behavior: Folders in the new Content Fragment Editor can be created. They cannot be moved, copied, cut or deleted. Improved/Expected Behavior: Folders can be moved, cut, copied and deleted by editors. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Assa Abloy Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
機能改善要求（RFE）概要： Regarding the replication process when a page is locked and a deletion process is executed ユースケース： If the deletion process is executed while the page is locked, the replication process (private) is not executed, and the page is deleted in the Author environment, while the page remains published in the Publish environment.From the user's point of view, the deletion process is considered private, so it appears as if the process has ended normally, and errors caused by locks cannot be detected. Can you please improve the behavior so that the deletion process on Author cannot also be executed when locked? 現在／体験した動作： An event occurred in which a page was not actually private, even though we thought we had deleted the page and made it private.Upon investigation, it was determined from the log that this was due to the fact that the page was locked. 改善／期待される動作： The deletion process on Author cannot be executed while locked. 環境の詳細（AEM バージョン／サービスパック、もしあればその他の詳細）： AEM Cloud Service 顧客名／組織名 Nissan スクリーンショット（ある場合） コードパッケージ（ある場合） @csato @正吾亀山
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: This ticket addresses issues with the AEM asset timeline and revision tracking not displaying all changes, focusing on understanding limitations and potential solutions. Use-case: Karen Barton (AWC Librarian) reported that asset overwrites by Jeff Hess were not shown in the timeline, causing tracking frustration. Sainikhil Reddy (Bounteous Dev) explained AEM timeline shows workflow/publication events but not all low-level edits without custom versioning or audit listeners. Sarah Scalia (Bounteous) noted implementing such custom workflows in AEM as a Cloud Service is complex, estimated as a 15-point effort. The asset metadata like "Modified" and "Modified By" is visible in column and list views but not in card or insight views. Current consensus is that timeline limitations are due to AEM core behavior; custom solutions would require significant development effort. Current/Experienced Behavior: timeline does not show all levels of changes Improved/Expected Behavior: timeline should show changes of any capacity to each asset Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Assets Cloud Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Users should not be able to download the assets from Brand Portal, if they have reached expirationDate. Use-case: To maintain consistency and compliance. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently its not blocked in brand portal Improved/Expected Behavior: Non admins should not be able to download assets from brand portal, if it has reached expiration date. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Signify Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enable Full PDF Preview in Brand Portal "Link Share" Mode Use-case: Brand and Creative teams frequently share CI guidelines and marketing documents with external agencies, vendors, and regional partners using Brand portal share link. Current/Experienced Behavior: Manually resending files or explain partial previews which in results in: * Slower collaboration and review cycles * Suboptimal brand experience for external stakeholders * Inconsistent experience between internal and external user Improved/Expected Behavior: Providing a complete in-browser preview of multi-page PDFs is critical for: * Ensuring brand consistency without needing to download files * Reducing redundant back-and-forth communication * Avoiding re-sharing or clarifying partially visible content * Maintaining a seamless, professional experience for partners Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Assets (6.5.20) : Brand portal Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
It would be great to allow administrators to set specific and unique error pages when a login error happens. I have two types of users in my system. Those who authenticate with SSO and those who do not and use the mydomain.my.workfront.com/login page to log in directly and manage their password. Unfortunately, any user who errors out of SSO authentication bounces to that /login page which then causes an error loop for many users who do not realize that they can't log in through that page with their SSO credentials.It would be better if I could set a specific error page that directs them to help articles on how to resolve their SSO error and get to log in again rather than redirecting them to the /login page. But I need to keep that /login page as the error page for my users who do NOT use SSO. I need both options available because I have two separate use cases here.
In marketing, we work with many files that are animated GIFs for motion in social media and paid media channels. When our teams need to review these files, it's very difficult now with only allowing individual GIFs to be reviewed as a single proof. You should be allowed to upload multiple GIFs and create a single interactive proof where the GIFs are animated. As it stands today, you must upload every individual GIF to see animation and it can create up to 20+ proofs for someone to review which isn't reasonable. Our teams end up not using the proofing for all animation because no one is going to review 20+ links when they can just open up the files on their computer instead. This is the current rule in place: You can combine GIF files; however, please note that animated GIFs will be processed as static and NOT interactive. Future state: You can combine GIF files; and animated GIFs will be processed as fully interactive proofs.
Description - Deadline reminder notifications aren't being sent to the assigned to user after the task constraint is changed before the task is due during the lift of the project. I had submitted a case with Adobe Support and they concluded that changing the task constraint while the project is current blocks the user assigned to the task from receiving the deadline reminder that is set up in the automatic reminder section. It would be helpful to have the deadline reminder notifications to still be sent to assigned users of tasks even after the task constraint is changed during the life of the project. Why is this feature important to you - Users are losing track of tasks they need to complete after the task constraint on tasks their assigned to is changed. They no longer received the system deadline reminders which is causing them to miss completing those tasks on time. We strive to have tasks completed by their planned completion dates regardless of the task constraint set. How would you like the feature to work - Deadline reminders we've set up in the system should still be sent to the users assigned to tasks even after the task constraint is changed while the project is active. Current Behaviour - Deadline reminders aren't being sent to assigned users of tasks after the task constraint is changed while the project is active.
DescriptionWhen using the Adobe Analytics API 2.0 to pull the details of our evars, we also need to know the expiration type and merchandising evar status. Why is this feature important to youWe're currently migrating our projects that use Adobe Analytics API 1.4 to API 2.0, but this latest version doesn't return whether an evar is set as merchandising and what its expiration type is. This feature used to exist in API 1.4, and we still need it as we use the API to keep our documentation up to date. How would you like the feature to workInclude the following key/value pairs in the response:"expiration_type": "page_view","expiration_custom_days": "1","merchandising_syntax": "product","allocation_type": "merchandising_last" For example, evar25 should return this: { "id": "variables/evar25", "title": "Internal Campaign Name (Product Syntax) (v25)", "name": "Internal Campaign Name (Product Syntax) (v25)", "type": "string", "category": "Conversion", "support": [ "oberon", "dataWarehouse", "realtime" ], "pathable": false, "extraTitleInfo": "evar25", "segmentable": true, "reportable": [ "oberon" ], "supportsDataGovernance": true, "description": "The ID of an internal promotion placement being impressed upon or clicked. Used to understand internal promotional conversion rates. Format {campaign type}:{campaign name}:{campaign location}", "multiValued": false, "expiration_type": "page_view", "expiration_custom_days": "1", "merchandising_syntax": "product", "allocation_type": "merchandising_last" } Current BehaviourIn the current version of API 2.0, there are no details about evars' expiration types and merchandising settings.
Description - When viewing a schema in any environment, when you change environments, the page would redirect you to the list of all schemas.Why is this feature important to you - AEP throws an error that is not readable to the user when trying to view schemas in a different environment.How would you like the feature to work - Just redirect the user to the list of schemas instead of throwing the error.Current Behaviour - An error is thrown.
Add the ability to get a Fusion Test Drive account. There is already the ability to request a Workfront Test Drive account, so this would go hand-in-hand with that.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - Request from users / teamsHow would you like the feature to work - A filter / view to see tasks assigned to a teamCurrent Behaviour - If the task is assigned to a "team" the people on the team do not see those tasks in Priorities / Calendar.The user (in the team) needs to click work on it first, then the task appears in Priorities / Calendar.
Description - - In Proof HQ, when creating Workflow templates it should allow us to add roles or teams that exist in Workfront.Why is this feature important - It reduces the need to maintain workflows in proof HQ and enhances the usage of proofing workflow templatesHow would you like the feature to work - When creating workflow templates in Proof HQ. While creating a stage and adding people to those stages, it should allow the user to not just select individual users but also allow them to select teams or roles from the respective Workfront instance.Current Behaviour - Proof HQ only allows the user to add individual users to stages when creating workflow templates in Proof HQ.
Objective of improvement:When two users share the same device and the Identity Graph Linking Rule is applied, let the anonymous browsing events associated with the same ECID be assigned to both profiles, rather than only the last one identified.Context:Applicant: The PL market, which seeks to implement specific use cases for SME.Example of use case:Offer leasing products or benefits by opening SME accounts to sme and/or individual profiles, if during anonymous browsing the user shows interest in SME products.Current situation:A user in Poland can have two profiles:Individual profile: customer_id=111, customer_type =ind (example).SME Profile: customer_id=222, customer_type=sme (example).Both profiles share the same ECID, as it is the same person using the same device.Current problem with Identity Graph Linking Rule:Public browsing events generated with the same ECID are assigned only to the last identified customer_id.This means that:If the public browsing event is the trigger, only the customer_id of the most recently logged in client will be impacted.Public browsing events are assigned exclusively to that customer_id at this point, which makes us lose the opportunity to contact the other profile.In order to impact both users, we need the ability to assign public browsing events to both profiles.
Description:We are encountering a limitation in the New Teams Workfront Application where the external lookup field is not visible. This field is essential for our workflows, and its absence is impacting our ability to manage requests effectively. Issue Summary:In the Teams Workfront App, the field does not appear at all.Troubleshooting steps already taken:Uninstalled and reinstalled the Workfront app in Microsoft Teams.Verified that the latest version of the New Teams client is in use (in use for over a year). Feature Request:We request you (Adobe Workfront) to:Enable full support for external lookup fields in the Teams Workfront Application.Provide clear documentation on any limitations or configuration requirements for using external lookup fields in Teams integrations. Business Impact:Incomplete request forms due to missing fields.Manual workarounds required, reducing efficiency.Increased risk of data inconsistency and user frustration. We believe this enhancement will significantly improve the usability and consistency of the Workfront experience within Microsoft Teams.
Description -A customer's marketing team is currently facing a significant limitation within the Campaign Web UI: they are unable to directly upload images and PDFs. The existing drag-and-drop template functionality (Email HTML editor (ACRITE app)) does not effectively meet their needs for managing these assets, leading to inefficiencies in their content setup processes. Why is this feature important to you -This feature is crucial because our customer's marketing team is currently unable to efficiently set up their content within the Campaign Web UI due to the lack of a direct upload mechanism for images and PDFs. The current limitations are hindering their ability to effectively use drag-and-drop templates and are impacting their productivity. How would you like the feature to work -We envision a dedicated "Upload" tab or a clearly accessible interface within the Campaign Web UI that allows users to browse and directly upload image and PDF files. This would streamline the process of incorporating assets into their campaigns, eliminating current workarounds. Current Behaviour -Currently, users are unable to directly upload images and PDFs via the Campaign Web UI. The existing methods, particularly concerning the setup of drag-and-drop templates, do not provide an effective solution for managing these types of assets.
Description - Have the ability to iterate (list method) in calculated fields, the same way it can be done in reports using text mode.Why is this feature important to you - This feature would be valuable as it enables users to reference Workfront objects that are directly related to the one they’re currently working on. It ultimately enhances efficiency and clarity when managing interconnected Workfront objects. How would you like the feature to work - the same it is currently working on reports. Current Behaviour - Is not feasible
When using the 'updates' function or tab, it would be useful for our teams to be able to utilize this space in a fashion similar to email. IE- to add colored text to responses, in order to differentiate between users. Also, it would be helpful to allow certain updates to be 'pinned' to the top of the page so they don't get lost. OR to categorize them as "bulletins or job notes" of some kind to set them apart from the back and forth threads.
Description - Would love to be able to see user active statuses within Workfront to see who is active in WF, away or offline similar to Teams chat.Why is this feature important to you - This will allow us to see who we may need to follow up with outside of Workfront and/or escalate to another person on their team/manager.How would you like the feature to work - Colored circular icon next to each users name as it appears throughout the system - login, project owner, updates, task assignments, etc.Current Behaviour - N/A
When a project is being assigned sometimes there are multiple team members for one specific role working on it, workload balancer only lets you assign to one role and the rest is manual work, it would be a game changer if this minor edit is made
Description - In the current single advanced proofing workflow, once a user is added to a stage, they can no longer be included in a later stage of the approval process. This creates the need to manually issue a second workflow if an individual user acts an an initial and a final approver. Some smaller teams I have worked with rely on one or two people to both do initial approvals and feedback while then also being the "final" approver, once all team member have given then comments and approvals.Why is this feature important to you -The need to manually create a new workflow for a "final" approval creates drag in the SLA's of certain proofing Workflows, or requires Fusion to act as a intelligent trigger to make the new workflow. For small marketing teams, Fusion is usually cost prohibitive.How would you like the feature to work - I would like an individual user to be able to be applied to each stage in an advanced proofing workflow. This will allow small teams in which managers act as both initial reviewer/approvers as well as a final last-mile approver to the overall workflow.Current Behaviour - Right now, once a user is entered as an user on any stage, they no longer appear in a user picklist when creating additional stages.
Description -Ability to filter DataFlow based on Target dataSet is missing in the AEP UI Why is this feature important to you -When there are 10s of more dataFlow going into a perticular dataSet, we only have an option to filter by source Application. Many times we want to see how many dataFlow are going into single dataSet. How would you like the feature to work -We want ability to filter dataFlow by target DataSet Current Behaviour -We can only filter dataFlow by source Application
Description - The process of planning an iteration on the Backlog tab of the New Experience is not intuitive and causes a lot of problems when trying to respect a teams capacity when planning an iteration. Why is this feature important to you - Users must be able to easily see if stories selected exceed the total iteration capacity during the planning of an iteration in order to respect the teams capacity. This will also make it much easier for user to properly plan iterations without having to go back and forth through pages in Workfront. How would you like the feature to work - When a user wishes to plan/create a new iteration from the Backlog tab, the user can click on the "Plan Iteration" button and a new section appears above the list of stories. The user can enter the necessary iteration information (name, start date, end date, focus, capacity, and goal). The user can also see in the same section the total capacity available for the iteration (capacity x focus). The user can then go through the list of stories and check/uncheck work. If the user selects stories that exceed the total available capacity for the iteration, the stories that exceed are highlighted in red in the backlog. Bring back the previous Workfront behavior as shown in the video on the following Experience League page - Plan and create an iteration | Adobe Workfront. Current Behaviour - When a user wishes to plan/create a new iteration from the Backlog tab, the user must first select work items, then click the "Plan Iteration" button. The "Plan Iteration" dialog box appears where the user can see if they have selected too many/little stories for the iteration (based on team capacity = total points). If the user has selected too many/little stories for the iteration, they must close the "Plan Iteration" dialog box in order to deselect/select stories.
issue: The system shall provide functionality to sort project updates by date, displaying the latest updates at the top. This feature will be another option to the current grouping by topic/conversation, which hinders the ability to quickly locate recent comments. The new sorting mechanism will ensure that users can easily find the most recent updates within the project interface.justification: The current method of grouping updates by topic/conversation makes it difficult to track the latest comments, leading to an over-reliance on emails for status updates. Implementing date-based sorting will streamline the process of finding recent updates, thereby improving efficiency and reducing dependency on external communication channels.What is Not an acceptable Enhancement:Only sorting updates by topic/conversation via the search bar, without the option to sort by date and date range.
Description - From one of my users, can we get the ability to delete a proof version in the "All Versions" page of a proof document? It makes more sense than having it only in the proof summary area, where you need to go through multiple clicks to get where you want. Why is this feature important to you - more efficient way to delete versions How would you like the feature to work - noted above, delete from the All versions location (picture 1)Current Behaviour - noted above, it shows in the proof summary location for version deletion (picture 2)
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.
