Product Communities

Description:Allow users to highlight areas in a proof when replying to comments, not just when creating new ones.Importance:Stakeholders often miss highlighting content or only mark part of what's relevant. This would improve clarity and streamline review workflows.How it could work:When replying to a comment in a proof, users should have the option to create a new highlight linked to their reply.Current Behaviour:Highlighting is only available when adding a new comment, not when replying to an existing one.

Description - When marketing operations use workfront planning for their campaign planning, the stakeholders would want to convert a plan (planning record) into a brief (request) in workfront. post this conversion either using fusion or manual request submission, the ideal experience for a 360 view of a campaign plan would be to link the brief (request) back to the campaign plan. However the current planning config doesn't have option to relate a request object record.Why is this feature important to you - This impacts the brief intake process and indicate a critical gap between Workfront planning and Workfront on a Content Supply Chain workflow for a Marketer.How would you like the feature to work - Create a relationship connection between Workfront planning record type with Workfront request object.Current Behavior - No Option to relate Workfront Planning record with Request object in Workfront

We would like to add the same person to a review route twice in different stages. We have the project owners review proofs in stage 2, but then also need to review again in the last stage after everyone else has reviewed, so they can review other's comments, comment back for clarification or answer any questions.Why is this feature important to you - Streamlines the process. Currently, the project manager has to reach out to the project owner after the route is complete to confirm there aren't any comments that need to be responded to, and wait for the project owner to reach back out to them when they've had the chance to review again. If they can be added again to the final stage, they will get the automatic email notification that it's their turn again. Once the review is complete, the PM knows it can be routed straight back to the necessary team without any additional steps in the process. 

Hi,    Please build an out-of-the box OpenID Connect(OIDC) Authentication handler in Adobe Experience Manager(v6.5, on-premise) with an external identity provider Azure AD using the OIDC protocol.  

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: In the Cloud Manager > Pipelines > Exprience Audit, allow to define custom request headers. Use-case: This is required for customers using BYOCDN, as we need to provide X-Edge-Key header to access the AEMaaCS publisher. Current/Experienced Behavior: Cannot use Experience Audit in BYOCDN setup where AEMaaCS publisher is not publicly available. Improved/Expected Behavior: Can use Experience Audit in BYOCDN setup where AEMaaCS publisher is not publicly available. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): 2025.5.21005.20250522T173058Z Customer-name/Organization name: Assa Abloy Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):  

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enhance Dispatcher cache invalidation mechanisms to support automatic, granular purging of cached content fragment updates without manual rule configuration. Use-case: Organizations using AEM Content Fragments heavily rely on Dispatcher caching for performance. When content fragments are updated or versioned, the cache often does not invalidate automatically, leading to stale content being served until manual cache flushes occur. Current/Experienced Behavior: Dispatcher requires explicit cache flush rules or manual cache invalidation after content fragment changes. This is error-prone, inefficient, and can lead to content inconsistencies on live sites. Improved/Expected Behavior: Provide built-in intelligent cache invalidation that automatically detects changes in content fragments (including variations, tags, or linked metadata) and triggers selective Dispatcher cache purges. This reduces operational overhead and ensures up-to-da

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: We request the ability to sort folders located at the root level of the AEM DAM, similar to how sorting is currently available for subfolders within other folders. Use-case: As a user managing digital assets in AEM, I need to be able to sort the folders at the root level of the DAM to improve navigation and asset management efficiency, especially when dealing with a large number of folders. Current/Experienced Behavior: Currently, folders at the root level of the DAM cannot be sorted. Only subfolders within other folders have sorting options available. Improved/Expected Behavior: Folders at the root level of the DAM should have the same sorting capabilities as subfolders, allowing users to organize them as needed. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud Service Customer-name/Organization name: ACCIONA SA Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Block publishing of folder/assets to AEM Publisher but allow to Brand Portal Use-case: We are using Brand Portal and we have users who accidently publish the assets to AEM publisher in place of Brand Portal. At the ACL level, it is only possible to grant or deny a user the ability to replicate generally with crx:replicate which does not work individually for AEM publisher and Brand portal. (Both can be granted or both can be denied) Current/Experienced Behavior: We can deny the users to replicate to AEM publisher and Brand Portal as a whole. Improved/Expected Behavior: We can deny the users to replicate to AEM publisher and Brand Portal individually. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM cloud Customer-name/Organization name:   Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Update the Sidekick browser extension when navigating Edge Delivery Sites, to include the following:- Ability to move the sidekick. Right now it's anchored to the bottom - Have a way to show if the page that we're on can show what other pages are linked to it, which would be a helpful reference Use-case: As an author, I would like to position the sidekick on the browser. As an author, it helps to be able to know what pages are linking to the one I'm on. Current/Experienced Behavior: No way to position the sidekick or view linking pages. Improved/Expected Behavior: Position the sidekick and view linking pages. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Edge Delivery Services site, Google Docs Customer-name/Organization name: Perficient Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enhancement request for Search Insights UI – expanding keyword display, refining date range filters, and enabling raw data export. Use-case: The customer wants to better evaluate the performance of search-related metadata by understanding which keywords are most frequently searched. This helps validate metadata tagging and optimize asset discoverability. They need more flexibility in analyzing search behavior both through UI and downloadable reports. Current/Experienced Behavior: The UI currently only shows the top 5 keywords. Available time filters are limited to “last 30 days” or “last 1 year”. Users cannot export raw data, such as search terms and their respective search counts. Improved/Expected Behavior: Ability to display more than 5 top keywords (e.g., top 10, 20, or customizable number). More granular date range options (e.g., weekly, monthly, custom ranges). Option to export anonymized raw data (e.g., sea

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Our Corporate Nexus Infrastructure (which contains non-public artifacts needed for the Build Pipeline) has IP restrictions in place. We have to explicitely IP-whitelist any client that tries to fetch artifacts from it. Currently, the Build Pipeline cannot access it because the IPs used are non-deterministic and not documented. Use-case: Maven Build Pipelines need artifacts from Corporate Nexus that has IP restrictions in place. Current/Experienced Behavior: Maven Build Pipelines are not allowed to access Corporate Nexus. Improved/Expected Behavior: The IP addresses used by the Maven Build Pipelines are documented, hence whitelisted at our infrastructure, the Maven Build Pipelines can access the Corporate Nexus and fetch the required artifacts. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud Service Customer-name/Organization name: Helvetia Versicherungen Screenshot (if applic

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Idea is to introduce Adobe PDF auto-tag API functionality while trying to upload the PDFs. This will enhance the accessibility of the pdfs on the system. Use-case: We have experienced lot of non-accessible or semi-accessible pdfs on AEM assets and it will be explicit effort to re-run the auto-tag API separately to make them accessible. Current/Experienced Behavior: If auto-tag API has to be used, we need to separately run the API by uploading the PDFs on Adobe cloud to generate Asset ID to perform any operation. Improved/Expected Behavior: Make PDFs accessible with automated workflow to trigger the Auto tag API. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): NA Customer-name/Organization name: Deloitte Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enable me to search AEM Assets that contain a particular part of a music track by uploading a part of that music track. Use-case: If we have rights to use a particular piece of music for a limited period of time, we would like to be able to search the DAM to check that all instances if usage have been archived by the end date of the contract, without relying on assets owners tagging the assets. Current/Experienced Behavior: There's no way to search the DAM today to check that all video assets have been archived that use the track, so we risk usage rights issues. Improved/Expected Behavior: Confidence that all rights managed assets have been archived.  Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Assets Cloud Customer-name/Organization name: A UK Financial Institution Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Failed Asset Bulk Uploads Error is replaced with a more specific error or lets correct assets upload Use-case: User need to understand which file is causing errors during upload, elsewise they need to uplaod one by one. Current/Experienced Behavior: Whenever a user is uploading assets in bulk and only one asset is faulty (unsupported filetype, or other) the whole upload errs and one generic error message is displayed. Improved/Expected Behavior: The error message specifies the impacted asset(s) or all correct assets are uploaded and only the faulty assets get rejected (and generate an error message) Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Assets Author instance Customer-name/Organization name: ALDI SUED (Marketing Solutions) Screenshot (if applicable): Example of faulty file: I couldn't upload the asset here, so please use this sft link: Code package (if applicable): &

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I would like AEM to create custom renditions on the fly instead of when the asset is uploaded and processed. Use-case: I would like our users to be able to choose the specific rendition(s) they'd like to download in AEM. Currently in AEM if we create custom renditions AEM creates those renditions when the asset is uploaded and processed. If a user wants to download an asset they can download ALL renditions or just the original.   I would like to see these renditions only occur when the asset is being downloaded instead of when its processed. So when a user clicks to download an asset they would be prompted to choose how they want it delivered to them and then the system would render it out on download. This is a cleaner experience for the user and doesn't take up storage in the DAM with a bunch of renditions that may not be needed.   Taking this question further, I would also like to see this feature carry through to Ass