Build better products with our product team
Hello dear community,I have a question regarding the Quick Actions on the start page under “my tasks”.Is it possible to remove or uninstall the time tracking as an icon? We do not need this function and therefore our users should not see it.In addition, there are certain legal reasons why this should not be used in our company.I am grateful for any help.I have attached a screenshot so that you understand exactly what I mean thank you very much best jasmin
Description - Would love to see the ability to assign a default view for a project's tasks and issuesWhy is this feature important to you - Managing multiple views and switching between the views takes a lot of time. When collaborating, the users need to be on the same view.How would you like the feature to work - When creating a project new or from a template, the creator can assign a default view. Other users inherit that view or can change to their own. But at least it would be a starting point for collaboration.Current Behaviour - Users have to select views.
Description - Long values, particularly when paired with multiple metric columns, get truncated visually with an ellipses. While this is okay in a live Workspace report where the user can hover over the row to see the full value, when in a rendered PDF the values are completely lost, leaving stakeholders with missing information. It would be of great value to allow long values to wrap (similar to how there is an option to wrap headers). Why is this feature important to you - Data will be easier to see, with less information being lost when presented to Stakeholders. Having the wrapping be optional allows for people to control when and if they want their data to wrap or to truncate. How would you like the feature to work - Add an option to the settings on the dimension to allow the values to wrap, or not to wrap. Current Behaviour - No option to wrap, and PDF generation doesn't allow for hover states to see the full value
Description - One of the great things about Adobe Analytics is the rich set of components that come out-of-the-box, like Bounce Rate, First Time Visits, Mobile Traffic, etc. Today, Customer Journey Analytics doesn't have that but, IMHO, can and should. Why is this feature important to you - So customers don't have a "huh, feels empty around here" experience when starting with CJA and novice users have something to start with. How would you like the feature to work - Based on the Adobe-provided XDM Schema Field Groups used in a Dataset for CJA, creating a Data View should have the option to add Adobe-provided Components, like Calculated Metrics or Segments, that fit the underlying Field Groups. For example, using the Web SDK Field Group should come with a Bounce Rate Metric, Mobile Traffic Segment, etc. Current Behaviour - 👁️👃👁️ 👄
Description / Why is this feature important to you / Current Behaviour - Workfront has the ability to separate labor costs between what was budgeted, what is planned, and what are actual labor costs. While there is an ability to separate expenses between what expenses are planned and what are the actual expense results, Workfront does not have the ability to separate expenses between what was budgeted and what was planned. A project's baseline / approved budget in terms of expenses must be stored outside of Workfront. Planned expenses entered on the Expenses dashboard tab and/or on Tasks get automatically updated on the Business Case. If a project manager adds planned expenses that weren't budgeted, how would we report a variance between budgeted and planned expenses? Answer: Workfront users are not able to report a variance between budgeted and planned expenses. How would you like the feature to work -Similar to how a budget is entered on the business case for labor, allow the expenses entered there to be the baseline budget separate from planned expenses. Planned expenses would be separate and change to reflect what is expected to happen, whereas the budgeted expenses would remain equal to the baseline approved budgeted expenses. Users would then be able to report between budgeted expenses, planned expenses, and actual expenses, similar to how users are able to report between budgeted labor, planned labor, and actual labor.
The email sent when a new request is submitted states the following:"Hi,[Request Submitted Name] just requested your team to work on [Name of Request]. It's all yours." This is a problem because many of our requests are set up so they are sent to a TEAM and not to an individual user. The wording of "It's all yours." implies that the recipient of the email is responsible for working on the request. We want to promote Workfront as easy to use and this adds additional unnecessary confusion. It confusion because it is not an accurate or necessary word choice to use in the email. We'd like to have Workfront run changes like this past a group of experienced users so they can provide input. This may seem like a small mistake to make but would have been caught by the community if shared in advance of launch. Please have those three words removed because they are a unnecessary part of the email communication.
Description -In the Omniture Legacy UI, there is an option to expire a user after a set amount of days (see screenshot). It would be helpful to be able to utilize the same functionality within the Admin Console, specifically Adobe Analytics, to ensure that external users are expired after a certain number of days (ideally 6 months), but ONLY if they haven't had any activity in the last 6 months. Why is this feature important to you -By having to expire every external user after 6 months, we are facing many users being locked out every 6 months, requiring our User Admins to unlock them, as well as not allowing them within the tools in the interim. If we changed the solution to only expire the inactive users, we would prevent time lost and would properly expire only those who required it. How would you like the feature to work - Have an editable expiry date for users within Admin Console who haven't had activity in the tool in x number if days Current Behaviour - no way to expire users except in the Legacy Omniture tool, which only allows a date; doesn't take into account active users.
Currently Marketo - LinkedIn Audience Match integration only uses email address to match audiences in LinkedIn. This causes small match rates and smaller audiences than when manually importing customer lists or using rival tools. LinkedIn Integration should be enabled to use all the possible data points to get higher match rates and better audiences. These include: email, firstname, lastname , jobtitle, employeecompany, country.
My organization is pretty good about not bothering folks with emails on Holidays or Weekends, however our Workfront emails still come through from the system even on days when we aren't open for business. This just leads to additional clutter in inboxes to sort through for users who are assigned to a lot of objects. My organization is pretty good about not bothering folks with emails on Holidays or Weekends, however our Workfront emails still come through from the system even on days when we aren't open for business. This just leads to additional clutter in inboxes to sort through for users who are assigned to a lot of objects. We have holidays identified in our corporate calendar in Workfront so the system knows folks aren’t working on these days. With that same logic we should be able to suspend emails on these days
Retain Simple Formatting When Exported to Excel such as having Two Columns Combined.
Right now the only way to extend work on a task into the next sprint is to move it. We want to keep track of the points and work completed in the last sprint, but move the task into the next iteration. When doing this we lose all of the update history but need that to continue work.
Description - This is something I continue to be frustrated by when I have to break out data in Workspace. I created Classifications so I could break out my data, but it's a highly time-consuming challenge to constantly break out the data to make it consumable on a larger scale. Instead of a limited set of results, I am requesting for Adobe to simply blow out the full breakdown for a specific table that we build in a Workspace.For instance, if I have THREE fields from a Campaign Tracking code I would want to break down, it would be a lot easier to drag them into the Table Builder and hit BUILD than to individually drag my fields into the Freeform table, even if I have multiples highlighted to enable a certain level of mass updates. Why is this feature important to you - This is about saving a LOT of time and tedium. How would you like the feature to work - Drag the necessary fields into the Freeform Table, and instead of being limited to 5 items in my breakdown, it would breakdown ALL items appropriately, as demonstrated by the fields selected. Current Behaviour - Currently, the interface only allows a maximum of 5 items to be broken down at each level and barely scratches the surface for what is often needed when a breakdown is being attempted at this level.
When is Marketo going to support AVIF images?You can upload an AVIF image but when selecting images to use, no thumbnail is displayed (it just shows no preview available). Once you select the AVIF image, you get a system error. Dismiss the error and everything is fine, but this is really annoying and makes it harder to select the proper image.Here is the error:
Please create a way for me to update the field label of a field when it is in use! We have fields that we are using throughout our instance that are too deeply integrated to update with the current workflow. Our specific use case is related to attribution tracking. We are adding and changing some UTM fields and would like to update our field labels to denote 'First Touch' and 'Last Touch'. We are using global forms but the fields are still too intimately tangled with our programs, filtering, etc. for us to be able to remove the field from use in order to update the name. Its not critical to the business but it would make my life a whole lot easier if we could do this!
For audience composition, enrichment with a lookup dataset is a useful feature. However to generate the lookup dataset, either an external data load or a scheduled query in Data Distiller is needed to populate the dataset.Quite often this data is of a "refresh" nature, i.e. the best way to handle is to purge the dataset, and reload the fresh data - as record links may also be deleted in the new load.Dropping the dataset, and creating a new one with CTAS is not an option, since the reference link for enrichment in the Audience Composition would need to be restored. Why is this feature important to you - we have multiple use-case scenarios where we have to enrich a certain segment with extra data for personalization in AJO.- we have also use-cases where the rule segment builder is insufficient to design the query - a designated more complex query (via query service) is needed to prepare extra data which can be used in to filter on. Adding this extra data to the profile could bloat the profile at the end (if multiple of these scenario's are needed). How would you like the feature to work- the ability to run a CTAS "replace" query, where the previous inserted batch is deleted before the new batch is inserted Current Behaviour- batch deletion is only possible via API, and needs an external process to manage. We would like to have an option which is part of Data Distiller and does not require an external process.
Can a feature be added to make the name of an already established proof static? Now when a revised proof is added, if it is a single document or multiple documents added to a combined proof this is not the case. If a single document is added as a new version, and the user does not edit the document name, the proof is renamed to match the new document. Why? If new documents are added to a combined proof then the proof asks the user to add a new name. It would make the user experience better if once a proof is started, the default should be to pick up the previous name automatically. There can still be an option to edit the name but that should be secondary. It seems like the default should be to always use the name of the previous proof and not default to renaming a new single proof based on the file added.How would you like the feature to work?It would be great to flip the default behavior to not rename a revised proof. Current BehaviourWF Proof defaults the proof name based on the file being added. For revisions to an already established proof, the default is to rename the proof based on the file being added. For combined proofs, it makes sense that users have to add the initial proof name but revised proofs have a blank field to name revised proofs.
Description - We have a business use case where users need to export CJA Reports to DLZ. Currently, the exported file names appear as follows: cja-export-CDE-9a9DDD-e6bd-456b-a1e6-f99b9fb1d622-173111111537-0.csv.gz. With this naming convention, it's challenging to identify which user exported a specific CJA report when multiple users are exporting files to DLZ.Why is this feature important to you - If multiple users are exporting the files its hard to understand who exported the file and what type of export it is.How would you like the feature to work - What we need:1. Is there a way to prefix the report with the (user ID) and a timestamp during export2. As soon as a scheduled (or manually) report is exported, an alert email should be sent to the end user, indicating that the report CNID_DATESTAMP_REPORTNAME... has been exported to DLZ. Current Behaviour - file export to DLZ just shows this: cja-export-CDE-9a9DDD-e6bd-456b-a1e6-f99b9fb1d622-173111111537-0.csv.gz
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Since the Dispatcher doesn't support ETags it creates unnecessary traffic between the Dispatcher and the CDN by sending unchanged content. Use-case: The page is cached on both CDN and Dispatcher. CDN sends a request to the Dispatcher with the f-None-Match header. The Dispatcher responds with HTTP 200 and the content in the body, even though the content hasn't changed and the CDN already has the latest version. Current/Experienced Behavior: The Dispatcher is always returning HTTP 200 code when delivering cached content. Even when the cache ETag header value matches the value of the If-None-Match header in the request. Improved/Expected Behavior: The expected behavior would be for the Dispatcher to return HTTP 304 code with no body when ETag matches the value of the If-None-Match header. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Latest AEMaaCS - 2024.10.18311.20241017T104455Z Customer-name/Organization name: Assa Abloy Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - At the moment you can't map fields from an incoming XDM object to the data object. Why is this feature important to you - We want to be able to have a 'clean' XDM object sent from the client to the Datastream, and then in the Datastream map values to the data object to populate Adobe Analytics. As we can't do this at the moment, we have to duplicate things client-side. e.g. we put the value in XDM for the RT-CDP and duplicate that value in the data object for Adobe Analytics. This causes the most pain on mobile apps where we are more reliant on developers to do the setting of variables. How would you like the feature to work - When mapping fields in a Datastream, I want to be able to set paths in the data object as the 'Target Field' Current Behaviour - Currently it returns an error "Invalid schema path"
Description - I would like to "watch events" for specific user in Fusion, or converse exclude from watching specific userID. Why is this feature important to you - This would be huge resource saver and performance improvement for Fusion scenarios. Any upgrade to filtering capabilities limits the number of when scenario gets triggered. This saves customers operations, Fusion/Adobe resources, so the benefit is mutual. How would you like the feature to work - have an option to include/exclude updates made to a given object type by a userID. This field is available in watch event output bundle, so I'm guessing adding this as filter option should be easy. Current Behaviour - We use service account to perform tons of operations in Workfront. Excluding this account in watch event modules is critical to limit the number of times scenarios are being triggered without a need. Worst case scenario is where ~90% of times scenario is triggered by service account updates and I can only filter that after first module.@gevorg_kazaryan
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: This feature will enable organizations to define metadata validation rules based on compliance or guideline requirements and extract detailed reports for discrepancies. This will facilitate better data governance and streamlined updates to metadata across the organization. Use-case: Organizations often face challenges ensuring metadata adheres to evolving compliance regulations or organizational guidelines. Manual validation processes are time-intensive and error-prone, leading to non-compliance risks and inconsistencies in metadata quality. This feature addresses the need for automated validation and actionable reporting. Current/Experienced Behavior: Metadata validation is performed manually or using scripts, leading to inefficiencies. There is no unified interface or reporting mechanism to validate metadata against dynamically defined compliance rules. Discrepancies or outdated metadata are identified late, causing delays in remediation and compliance violations. Improved/Expected Behavior: Provide an intuitive interface for users to define validation rules for metadata (e.g., required fields, formatting, values adhering to controlled vocabularies). Automate metadata validation against these rules and generate detailed discrepancy reports. Offer configurable outputs (e.g., exportable reports in CSV/Excel formats) for review and remediation. Integrate with workflows for updating and re-validating metadata. Include support for recurring or scheduled validation processes. Ensure compatibility with diverse metadata structures and schemas. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Currently we are unable to see the user who last modified the asset. There should be field where the user who last modified the asset should be captured. Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: Unable to see the user who last modified the asset. Some hard coded value like "dam-workflow-service" is seen for now. Improved/Expected Behavior: Instead of "dam-workflow-service" username or user email who last modified the asset should be there. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Prod/Stg/Dev Customer-name/Organization name: Signify Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Allow customize wywisyg inline and richtext. At the moment is limited the wysiwyg and only allow some actions instead to use the full power of the wysiwyg. Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: Improved/Expected Behavior: With universal editor at the moment is imposible to customize or extend buttons for wysiwyg inline and richtext component. Should be fantastic to have configuration to allow hide/add new buttons in the wysywig. One simple thing as a color picker. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Santander Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
機能改善要求（RFE）概要： This is a consultation about applying custom CSS when authoring with AEM. The core component is designed so that you can only change the ID and cannot add classes.In terms of html validation, I don't think you can use the ID of each component when there are multiple identical components. However, in this case, the ID name will be unique and the same style will be written in CSS. Request the addition of the Class property in the core component dialog. ユースケース： Add Custom class CSS in core component dialog 現在／体験した動作： 改善／期待される動作： 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）： 顧客名／組織名 Mitsubishi Electric Corp. 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）
機能改善要求（RFE）概要： About the menu for text components As attached, only 5 icons are displayed at the top of the text component editing screen. If you display it in full screen, more icons will appear. With the current specifications, you cannot tell if there are multiple icons unless you use the full screen.Very difficult to understand. Request that all types of icons be displayed even if it is not full screen. ユースケース： menu for text components 現在／体験した動作： 改善／期待される動作： view all icon 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）： 顧客名／組織名 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）
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.
