Product Communities

In Bizible, we should be able to configure what URL parameter Bizible looks to for the Campaign of the touchpoint to improve reporting. Currently, Bizible only looks for utm_campaign, but many organizations use other URL parameters to track this information.   Having this in place would vastly improve breaking down Bizible data by the Campaign dimension and create a less confusing experience for end users.

Can we have "calendar events" show in workspace?

Hello,   What if we could see a clean and simple counter for a scheduled email send or newsletter?    Thanks!

This is a bit puzzling, when submitting a simple request to the queue I put in subject, description, add file and scroll....................... because there is some ridiculous amount of white space, just to find submti button at the end. this happens regardless where the form is submitted: via requests page, emebedded form etc.Poor UX

I recently learned that adding a user to a Proof only gives them access to see the Proof and not the document. This means that if you create a file and send a Proof to your client to review and approve. After they make their decision, they have no way of getting back to that document unless they have saved the email and the Proof hasn't been achieved.My stakeholders were very confused (and so was I) when they went to the Project and there were zero Documents attached. I soon learned that sharing a Proof only shares the Proof and regretfully had to tell my 500+ users that they need to do "double work" and "share twice"

Suggestion:Allow the user to select or group Proof records in Workfront (in the Documents section) and launch Proof Viewer. Inside Proof Viewer, the user has the option to navigate through all the selected proof records without having to exit the Viewer. The user can review, comment, or make decisions.Benefit:Speeds up the workflow for reviewers/approvers who have a large volume to get through

Currently, if we have an outside partner on a project they can't see any documents we upload unless we manually add them to each doc via the sharing tool. If you're on the project, you should be able to see the documents - even if you're not on the main team using WF.

Much like how you can see documents added to tasks at the project level, we need this ability at a Portfolio level. There should be an option where the documents can ladder up to the Portfolio, where files added to tasks or projects can be seen at the Portfolio level. Documents just need to ladder up - or at least have the option to enable or disable this ability. We've found ourselves with a significant amount of orphaned files, and at our organization is being seen as a large limitation of the platform. Please help us!

Description -Currently, the content fragment model editor does not contain a radio data type.Why is this feature important to you -Most of the time content fragment contains some data like selecting gender. for this kind of work, we have to use the dropwon data type.for refrennce,I have written one blog for a similar kind of feature just to add color picker data type.https://blogs.perficient.com/2020/10/20/adding-a-color-picker-to-the-aem-content-fragment-model-editor/

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: A feature that can allow users to select and complete multiple inbox items. Use-case: Different assets in AEM DAM are getting submitted through workflow for librarian to review and publishing activity. Right now, Approver has to select single item in inbox and complete it. This process needs to be repeated for each workflow item in inbox Current/Experienced Behavior: Right now, We can select and complete single approval workflow item from AEM inbox. Improved/Expected Behavior: Allowing users to select multiple workflow items (same workflow process with different payloads) and complete(Approve) them one go instead selecting each item and completing it Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 Customer-name/Organization name: Hershey Screenshot (if applicable): NA Code package (if applicable): NA

As an admin, I would like the ability to set a retention policy and have proofs and documents deleted. At a minimum, a way to bulk delete would work as well. Proofs take up a large amount of storage and with legal document retention rules, it would be helpful to have an easy way to delete unneeded large 'files'.

I would like for the project team (Plan and Wok licenses) not to be able to delete the reports and dashboards that have been configured in the Layout Template (left navigation panel) for them.Ref to case 4111981206

in the NWE, the document type is not easily visible as seen in the screenshot. User has to navigate to different places to see what type of document was uploaded

Currently, if you build a report to check planned hours through a bar chart, they will be showing all grouped on the dates that the task was created - which is not realistic at all.This means that planned hours showing in the chart are a reflection of the total of planned hours of the tasks created that week (if you set to see by week). So if you have a task with one year duration and hundreds of planned hours, for example, you should see them distributed over the course of the task duration instead of see a giant bar in your chart on the week you created the task.

Zoom:"un-sync" the proof version views: When you click on an old comment, the zoom on the new proof changes, which complicates the reviewing processOpening Multiple Proofs at One TimeWe create multiple proofs per project. It would be helpful to be able to open them all at the same time in different tabs.Deleting Versions:Would like the capability to delete a version of a proof without deleting the entire proof.

I understand that there have ben changes in Workfront recently that relate to this suggestiuon, but I am unclear what the current status of this feature should be.At the moment, when a new proof version is created, all the roles from the previous proof are copied across. Workfront Support advise that this is the designed process; nothing to fix.I suspect that this feature works for some businesses and not for others. Rather than having 'one or the other' why not build in an 'option' within 'WF Proof > Account Settings', such that each business can choose whether they want the roles to be maintained, or not.Our business routinely uses the following process… Proof Version 1 1. Designers create proof and add Moderator2. Moderator reviews proof to determine decisiona. If no additional decision maker is required, then Moderator simply applies their decisionb. If Moderator is happy with proof, but additional decision makers are required, then Mo

You know how you can include a message on Proofs? But then it sticks with the proof throughout it's lifespan unless you select 'discard custom message'? I would like to suggest that those custom messages only send the first time. It causes confusion when a proof owner adds a message on the first version that is only applicable to that version, and then it carries through on version #2 because they forgot to take it off.

Currently we can filter by Team User, but would be great to be able to filter by Assignment and Projects and some other options as well.This request comes from lots of our planner users.

The Pinbar makes it far too easy to Unpin or move your pinbar items inadvertently. There needs to be a "Lock Pinbar/Unlock Pinbar" toggle to allow more confidence and usability of this feature.Thanks!Steve

At the moment, it is not possible to do any actions in bulk in the Navigation tree   For example, it should be possible to select multiple assets and then do the following actions to them in bulk: moving, cloning, deleting

There's already quite a few ideas out there about being able to calculate with score fields, but unless I missed something this one was not previously addressed yet. I would really like to be able to use the Score was Changed filter with a constraint that it actually was a score increase rather than a score decrease. Currently, you can only achieve anything close to this by specifying that the previous value has to be less than something and the new value more than something. Can it be made so you can specify the new value is higher than the previous value?

Currently, if we use A/B testing in the webinar emails, all the invitees are added as members of the program and a workaround suggested for this was to create an email template for A/B test in design which is not the ideal way.    Having an A/B test should not affect the way members are created for a webinar program.   It would be nice to have a standard way to classify people as members regardless of A/B test or not.

At the moment if you want to filter out people who have done an action more than X number of times you have to put in the original activity filter e.g. "Campaign was Requested", along with the corresponding inactivity filter "Not campaign was requested", which has a "Min number of times constraint".   This is very hacky and there should be an inbuilt filter constraint for maximum number of times

Would like to see if you could tie a workfront proof to a task? Can they be connected/linked together somehow? Example: if proof is approved by a user, the task I have created for them was to review the proof, could the approval in the proof automatically close the task they were assigned to?

Description - Enable power users to access some features that require the Administration role, but not all of these features.Why is this feature important to you - One use case for our primary group of users is that they want access to the Quarantines page under Administration > Channels so that they can review quarantined addresses and move them out of quarantine if needed.  These users should not have access to other aspects of the Administration role, such as creating new organization units and custom resources.How would you like the feature to work - Allow the creation of new roles for which we can designate which features are accessible to that role.  If this is not feasible, create some pre-defined roles that have some Administration features, but not all of them (particularly related to security and database structure).Current Behaviour - only users with the Administration role can access features of the Administration menu.