Product Communities

Assuming I have an evar1 on my site which triggers on every product page to capture the color of  the product. And assuming I had 2 visits to my site. Let’s say that the evar1 is  a regular evar, expires on visit, allocation last touch, and assuming the following scenario:  Pages visited User A - Visit #1 product page 1- color = blue evar1 is set. value = blue proudct page 2 color = red evar1 is set. value  = red product page 3 color=green evar1 is set value = green home page evar1 is not set   Pages visited User B - Visit #1 home page evar1 is not set  product page 3 color=green evar1 is set value = green marketing page A evar1 is not set marketing page B evar1 is not set       Question:​​​​​s:based on the above, if i build a report like the one below, what should i see and why? evar1 visits evar1 instances page views unspecified       blue       green       red        

Summary:I am using dataset lookup in AJO personalization, but it is returning empty values. My dataset has a primary identity and data is present. I have tried both approaches — with fields nested under the tenant namespace and also without nesting — but still getting empty results. Not sure what is causing the issue or how to fix it.AEP   configuration:schema : {tenant : {offerID (primary id),title ,description}}Dataset is enabled for lookup Identity is marked as primary Data exists in dataset (e.g., "IC121") Using hardcoded ID in lookupNote: Schema and Dataset is not profile enabledIn AJO (Campaign - CBE based), I am trying to access this data using personalization:Code:[ {{ datasetLookup datasetId="Dataset" id="ID121" result="offer"}} {“title” : “{{offer.tenant.title}}”,“description” : “offer.tenant.description”}] Issue:The response is:{title :””,description : “”} It seems like the lookup is not executing. Can anyone help me what i am missingThanks in advance

What conditions need to be met in order to set up one to many relationship?It has to be experience event schema?  

 Ever see this in a Smart List filter?The 2 options look the same to the naked eye. And whichever one you choose, you get the same results on the People tab. Yet records with the first value will prevent the person from syncing to SFDC because it’s not in the corresponding picklist! See, due to a malformed CSV import, there’s an extra U+2060 WORD JOINER before the G in the first option. That character is by definition invisible, so it makes sense that they look the same in the UI. (Though note several visible whitespace characters have the same behavior.) They also look the same in the person detail:I call this Schrödinger’s whitespace (or whitespäce to be more metal): it’s either absent or present depending on how you look for it.in Smart Lists, Marketo trims whitespace when creating the underlying database query, which is why the People results are the same but the character is still there in the database, so when you sync to SFDC — and this is absolutely, 100% appropriate! — the att

Hello community - I am new to Fusion and looking to use Fusion to create a report (or notification if report isn’t an option) that is a list of a users current proofs they are a “reviewer” only on. I don’t see any templates remotely close to this so starting here to see if anyone has done something similar or has any recommendations to get this to work.  So far looking to do the following: watch event for new proof Read the record of the proof to pull role filter by the role “reviewer”  Create report (or notification) What am I missing? 

I want to ingest data for orchestrated campaign: Should I enable dataset for Campaign Orchestration after or before ingestion? Using Data Landing Zone  Can I use JSON , CSV ??? Why  I do not see that dataset while setting up dataflow?? 

Hi Team,there is one dummy link appearing (like the below highlighted one) in all the link performance report which skews the report. any idea where it’s coming from? please share your thoughts!

We are building a solution in AEMaaCS to notify 3rd party system whenever a DAM asset is created, updated, or deleted — covering all asset types including images, documents, Content Fragments, and videos.Our approach uses AEM Eventing (Adobe I/O Events) with an Adobe I/O Runtime Action as the processor, which then forwards the event payload to 3rd party log monitoring system.One key question before we finalize the design:Will DAM asset events fire consistently from both the new Assets View console and the Classic Admin View (/assets.html)? Since both UIs share the same underlying DAM repository, we expect events to trigger regardless of which console is used — but would appreciate a confirmation.Any inputs from the community are welcome!https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/experience-manager-learn/cloud-service/aem-eventing/examples/event-processing-using-runtime-actionhttps://developer.adobe.com/experience-cloud/experience-manager-apis/api/stable/assets/author/#operation/asset_p

Why is that? What I need to do additionally? Or the components might be only shared in one Connection? 

¡Hola a todos!Estoy configurando una campaña de Nurture en Marketo y busco optimizar la frecuencia de envío según el nivel de compromiso (engagement) de los leads. Mi flujo actual es el siguiente: Email 1 (22 de mayo): Si abre pero no hace clic: Recordatorio en 14 días. Si abre y hace clic: Segundo envío en 30 días. Email 2: Se asigna un puntaje de 10 puntos por interacción. Los leads con mayor interés alcanzarán un acumulado de 20 puntos tras este segundo correo. Mi duda es: ¿Es posible cambiar la cadencia del tercer email a una frecuencia semanal, únicamente para aquellos que hayan alcanzado el puntaje ideal (20 puntos)?Me gustaría saber cuál es la mejor práctica para lograr esto: ¿Debería usar una Smart Campaign adicional para moverlos a un Stream con cadencia distinta o hay una forma de gestionarlo directamente dentro del mismo Engagement Program?

Hey everyone, I wanted to see the logic behind the already existing shared metrics & dimension; however, I am unable to open the items under this. Curious to know if someone has any answer to this.

Discover Sattva City Shettigere offering modern studio 1 BHK 2 BHK 3 BHK 4 BHK and penthouse apartments in North Bangalore. Enjoy premium amenities green surroundings excellent connectivity and strong future investment value in one of the fastest growing residential locations near Bangalore Airport.

Hi Team,In ACC v7, I am trying to upload image and video files (JPEG/MP4) by generating Base64 data and storing it in the schema.The process works fine for image files, but when I try to upload a video file, it does not work. I am currently using the web app for this.Could you please help me understand what might be causing this issue and suggest a possible solution?its give me error like this :WEB-530007 Error relaying '/webApp/getBase64Data' to URL 'http://localhost:8080/webApp/getBase64Data?_uuid=ertf-4567-0987-2345-42kh986C86k8&_lastModified=2026-05-05%2005:29:50.183Z&_debug&lang='. Regards,Navin B 

Hi community,I’m working on an AJO → ACC integration and running into a limitation with nested arrays in event payloads, such as cart items or receipt line items.From what I can tell, AJO Custom Action mapping handles flat fields well, but not nested collections cleanly.The options I’m aware of are:serialize the array upstream and parse it in ACC use middleware to reshape the payload before ACC send an ID and let ACC retrieve the full data separatelyMy main question:What approach are teams actually using in production for this, and which one has proven most scalable and maintainable?If there is a native way to pass nested arrays through AJO Custom Actions directly, I’d love to know.Thanks.

  In my recent project I extensively worked with Permission Sensitive Caching and Closed User Groups, aka. CUGs. It turned out to be a little more complex than I anticipated. So I started a 6-part article series to document and share my learnings: Part 1 — Using Closed User Groups to Control Access Part 2 — Setting up the Dispatcher and CDN for Permission Sensitive Caching  Stay tuned for more to come. 

Hi, I am looking to see if there is a way to get notifications to a webhook when Activities are created/updated in Target? 

I’m using Adobe Acrobat Classic.  I can’t figure out how to force the software to open a new window for each PDF file.  It combines them on the same window and I can’t alt-tab between PFD files for quick reviews to see documents changes between PDF files.  Can anyone help?

A user is unable to see the deadline in the report. I have raised this ticket multiple times, but the issue still persists.Upon checking, I found that this is related to how the stage deadlines are configured. For example, if there are two stages and the user is a reviewer only in Stage 1 (with no involvement in Stage 2), Adobe Workfront appears to consider only the overall (final) deadline rather than the stage-specific deadline. As a result, the relevant deadline is not visible to the user in the report.Could you please confirm:Is there an option to display stage-specific deadlines for users based on their assigned stage within reports?If not, is there any recommended workaround to achieve this?Looking forward to your guidance on this.

Summary:The native `workfront-maestro:createRecord` Fusion module does not fully abstract field IDs for linked/connection fields (many-to-many relationships), despite Workspace and Record Type being correctly selected by label from the UI. Expected behavior:The native module should handle the internal field key mapping automatically — developers should never need to know or use raw field IDs like `F69d64ac7f0097169d4b252c8` or construct objects with `_id` suffixed keys like `{"F69d64ac7f0097169d4b252c8_id": "Rc69..."}` manually. Actual behavior:For linked/connection fields, the module exposes `fieldID_id` suffixed keys in the nested object spec. Developers must manually construct payloads like:`[{"F69d64ac7f0097169d4b252c8_id": "Rc69..."}]`This defeats the primary value proposition of the native module over a Custom API Call, which is to abstract away raw field and record IDs. Impact:Teams building automations with linked fields are forced to hardcode field IDs into their Fusion scenar

I’m hoping someone can help me understand why reviewers/approvers on a proof are receiving two different approval experiences. In some cases, reviewers are prompted to “make a decision,” while in other cases they are only given the options “Approve,” “Approve with Changes,” or “Needs Work,” which is the workflow we want to use consistently. Because the options presented are not the same for all reviewers/approvers, it creates confusion in our review and approval process. Could you clarify what causes these different approval methods to be sent, and whether there is a setting or configuration that controls this behavior?I’m also seeing what appears to be a related issue when I upload a new document to a project. I automatically receive an approval notice in my Home widget, even though these documents do not actually require my approval. Note: when we upload documents, they automatically create a proof.   In this situation, I am consistently asked to ‘Make a Decision’.   This clutters th

I create relaton schemas for campaign orchestration and have a question. What does ‘Enable for segmentation’ means?Data may be used in AEP segmentation? Data may be used in orchestrated campaigns?