Product Communities

Kanban cards should be able to have the % completion removed from the card to avoid confusion!

When a task is assigned to multiple people, that task appears in each users HOME screen. However, from the home screen view, there is no indicator as to whether the other users are done with their portion of the task or not. It would be helpful if the users could see who was done with their part from the home screen, and not have to drop into the task object to see this information.This type of functionality is VERY helpful for the "workers" that are using WF to have work assigned to them, but DO NOT do their work in workfront. For example, our graphic design team. They get assignments to build assets through WF, so an aggregate location like the HOME screen is ideal for them to see all the work they need to do.

Linking Production Launch code to DTM is really helpful and a thoughtful feature. One less hassle to handle.If there is a possibility to enhance the linking functionality, we recommend to build the same linking functionality to Staging environment in Launch and DTM as we have it in production.This way, clients do not need to go through the hassle of deploying Launch embed code in their development environments for this migration. It would be an extra consistent approach to production, if we have the linking capability for 1 matching DTM and Launch testing environment. E.g. DTM Staging. Then, when the clients are ready to totally use the Launch embed code, we could deploy it to all environments including dev, staging and production.Meanwhile, as we currently do not have this feature, we use Fiddler, Charles, or Requestly to replace the DTM staging environment code with Launch embed code for testing. just FYI.Hope this helps. Thanks so much

Would like to have the flexibility to create a layout where I can ensure the issue reference number is displayed on the Top Right area of the issue information, just like issue %complete, issue assignment, status and planned completion are displayed.

Currently, we have a Dimension in the left & metric in the right if we want to interchange then it takes around 5 to 8 min for 1 freeform & normally every dashboard have 3 to 4 freeform for analysis & if it's a big project then it might increase to 7 or 8.Suggestion - Adding a button to interchange dimension with metric or metric with the dimension will save around 20 min for each workspace.

UPDATE:Turns out that the time is editable. But it's hidden by a failed user interface design. See https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/Adobe-Analytics-Ideas/Don-t-hide-user-actionable-visual-elements-e-g-in-Scheduled/idi-p/355327 Feature request: allow the user to set the time when he wants to receive a Scheduled Project's report. When scheduling a project, the user cannot set the time for the project's delivery. Instead, it will be sent at the time that the schedule has been last saved. For example, if I setup a Scheduled Project at 2:50pm, the subsequent reports will always be sent at 2:50pm. But that is not the ideal time to receive this reports. This is a ridiculous workflow because it demands that the user be at his computer, setting up the Scheduled Project, at the time that he expects to receive the reports later on.

Please add a column to show Priority of activities on the Activities List page itself, while also allowing sorting on this. This will save a lot of time while setting the priority of an activity where currently we have to maintain a list of all activities in an Excel sheet, and looking up the list to ensure new activity is not going to impact/clash with an existing activity. Regards,Rajneesh  

When I click into a report from a dashboard, it would be AMAZING if there were a breadcrumb trail allowing me to easily go back to the dashboard when I'm done editing the report.Since the NWE changes the URL between /edit and /detail each time you edit a report, just clicking the back button on my browser isn't a viable solution. I didn't see any other Ideas for this, but if one exists already please let me know!

As an admin of a mature Marketo Org, it would be extremely helpful to be able to specify what time zone date fields are adhering to when creating lists or global administration campaigns.  They can adhere to the instance-wide setting unless you specifically manually change it.  I know I can change my personal user timezone, but date fields in lists and campaigns still adhere to the instance-wide timezone setting.  It makes it difficult, if not impossible, to filter on date fields for time zones that are not the same as your instance setting. As a use case: we're creating a local data mart of Marketo data, and when we pull it using API, it's in GMT/ZULU format.  It's not possible to compare this exported list of people against Marketo's GUI without changing the instance-wide timezone to match. Alternatively, allow us to perform date calculations.

If I've zoomed in to see the gantt by week, i lose that granularity when I export the gantt - even if I select export 'what i see' . (I have the "Zoom To" set to "Project Duration".) I've been told by WF Support that this is 'working as designed'. Their current algorithm is: A) If displayed date range occupies less space than available paper width, gantt chart exports as-is without any change. B) If displayed date range occupies more space than available paper width, gantt chart tries to zoom out enough to fit the displayed date range. This currently results in zoom level changes. Please modify to also export as is for option B.

I would like the ability to manually lock a project from additional updates on a project by project basis. We need the ability to add time and supporting documents to a project for a period of time after the Project Manager "completes" the project. But want to lock it from additional updates after a desired period of time (say 2 weeks).Currently, it is locked at status completion or not at all.

(Cheers to @Matthew Fellows for reminding me about this one!)When using the "Send Sample" functionality directly from an email template to test code, several switches happen which actually break the email:There's a doctype switch which occurs on the email itself: the email will go from <!doctype html> to <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">Any meta tags or variables defined in the template are removed.Any parent container tags for mktoModules are removed. That is to say, if you have an email module defined as  <table class="mktoModule" [...]><tr><td></td></tr></table> it will only render everything from the table row onwards.This results in the email usually going lopsided and looking bad. While the recommended solution here is usually to create a test email, this is very confusing for email template developers who don't have a ton of Marketo experience. Can this behavior be chan

I would like to be able to annotate line and bar graphs in Analysis Workspace. I would like to be able to select which lines would be involved in the annotation and whether it is static or rolling based on the date if a date is involved.

On the document tab, the 3 view available are 'standard','thumbnail' and 'list'.The Workfront functionality is that the 'standard' view is the default for the documents tab.This idea is to have the 'view' remain to what the user had the last time the user was on the Documents tab. On the Task & Issues Tab on a Project, the view chosen by user remains the same as a user navigates to other Projects.Also note, the List view provides the same type of view that is displayed on all other screens throughout Workfront and that is why we need it to stick on that view. Documents doesn't display "Filter", "View" and "Grouping" dropdowns by default but all other screens do.

Enable system admin to unshare with a specific user multiple projects, tasks, etc. Today if 100 projects were shared with a user, you can not unshare the 100 projects at once, you have to unshare one by one by one by one by one by one by one.. .until done for a specific user.

Be able to load data into WF as object types to pull into type ahead fields in custom formsbe able to use a field twiceadd user license as a type of object type for type ahead fieldmuch better ways to make the form look and feel cleaner like an excel sheet

We have following requests: 1. Automatically update status of requests/issues that have been converted to projects (such as ‚ÄòConverted’) 2. Allow users to specify status of requests that have been approved via the approval process not just the ones rejected 3. Prevent the ability to convert to project once a request has been rejected Use Case 1: When users convert a request to project, the status remains ‚ÄòNew’ and there is no visual differentiation between the requests that are converted and those that aren’t converted. Use Case 2 and 3: For requests that have to undergo an approval process, the system allows users to specify the status upon entry, and the status upon rejected. There should be a way for users to also specify those request status that have been approved. This would provide a visual differentiation between the requests that are approved vs rejected. Once a request has been rejected, users should not be able to convert the request to a project

When images are attached as a document to a task or project, a little preview shows up in the home screen or when clicking on the document. However, when a word, excel, PPT, PDF, etc are added, there is not preview of the document, but just an icon of the type of file it is. It would be nice if a thumbnail image was displayed for non-image type documents.

Requestors have asked for a way to duplicate a past request so that they don't have to fill in all fields again for a similar type of request.

We have created three apps (dev, staging, production) in Mobile Services for push notification.  We also have one app in Launch to use the Experience Cloud SDK.  We have added the Mobile Services Extension and tried to connect the apps in Mobile Services for each environment, but it appears we can only connect one app at a time.  So we ended up creating three different properties in Launch.  It would be nice if Launch can handle all three apps in one property.  Thanks!

Treat each custom form as its own entity, so that users can complete the form's required fields at the project level and save the changes, rather than requiring all required fields across all custom forms. We have forms grouped at project level for ease of access, but users complete them at different stages of project workflow, making the use of required fields impossible. I cannot move a project to a new portfolio as an admin without completing the custom form fields, which is totally irrelevant to what I'm attempting to do. The forms should operate independently of each other, as well as independently of the Project/ Campaign/ Task details.

If an artwork routing is multi-page and has lots of comments, wading through dozens of comments packed onto the screen is difficult.One problem: clicking on a comment brings up a line pointing to "the general vicinity" of markup when zoomed out, but even when zoomed in, sometimes it is pointing at "air" or some tiny marker. Once you click the marker, then highlights, drawn boxes, and more spring into being.This is only made worse by high-resolution displays.What would be nice is a behavior not unlike Acrobat:Click on comment.All the other numeric "tags" on the screen vanish.All the markup associated with that comment appears.

Currently when you select an existing comment in PHQ the pointer/line that links to the comment or markup is a very light grey. It's very tough to see, especially on higher-resolution screens.I propose making it red to match the numeric "tags" on the proof. Or, make it configurable by the admin or by Support.

Consider if one makes any edit to a Rule, DE, Extension, etc, but then undoes/removes the edit, they are still required to build a library and move it forward to Production with a "changeless" change. Request is for a mechanism to "revert to the last built state". In other words, "trash any modifications to the element that do not match at least Dev state". e.g. If I have a library built in Dev, I should not be able to "undo" the element as it is locked in the upstream, but if there is no Dev/Stage/etc build, and the current state of the element === the current published state, and there is no delta to send upstream, I shouldn't have to build and publish a new (empty) library to flush it out of the backlog. Replicate at the most basic level:Choose a currently published rule and edit the rule by renaming it (append an "!" to the end, for example)Edit the rule again and remove the "!", returning it to essentially it's previously unchanged state (i.e. it mirrors what Production

Workfront currently supports JIT provisioning, which is great! One thing that would be amazing to see next is to support deprovisioning that is driven from the IDP. This way we wouldn't need to do an audit/clean up within Workfront in addition to deactivation of the user in the IDP.