Explore product-specific spaces to ask questions, share insights, and learn best practices.
Recently active
Introduce a runtime profile status to natively block profile re-entry while a user is still actively in-flight within an Orchestrated Campaign. Why is this feature important to you For daily recurring campaigns, architects currently face overlapping, concurrent journeys because profiles are pulled in again before exiting the workflow. Resolving this currently requires maintaining a custom active flag explicitly in the data model and updating it via external systems, which adds unnecessary architectural overhead. How would you like the feature to work OCM should natively expose a runtime profile status (such as "active" or "in-progress") that acts as a built-in mechanism to natively block campaign re-entry while a user is still actively in-flight. Current Behaviour Unlike standard Journeys, OCM does not natively expose a runtime profile status, providing no built-in mechanism to natively block re-entry while a user is still in-flight
Ensure Enrichment activities only expose the specific relational row that matched the initial "Build Audience" criteria rather than bleeding into the entire related-record level. Why is this feature important to you Practitioners need precise downstream personalization. When the system qualifies a profile based on a specific condition (like an order status of "Pending") but exposes all orders associated with that user during enrichment, it necessitates building redundant filtering logic directly inside the Enrichment data setup to prevent personalization errors. How would you like the feature to work The Enrichment step should automatically inherit and restrict the relational data to only the specific row that matched the initial condition in the Build Audience step. Current Behaviour The "Build Audience" step only qualifies the Person ID, and the downstream enrichment step automatically exposes the broader related-record level for that person rather than restricting it to the matched
Your ecommerce platform isn't slow because of traffic. It's slow because of architecture.Global ecommerce is heading toward $7.4 trillion by 2026. And the brands eating that market share all have one thing in common: they ditched monolithic platforms years ago.As someone who architects large-scale commerce platforms daily, Adobe Commerce, Shopify Plus, headless builds, here's what I'm seeing on the ground:The shift to Composable Commerce is no longer a trend. It's the baseline.What composable actually means in practice:→ Your frontend (Next.js / React) is completely decoupled from your backend→ Your commerce engine handles cart, catalog, pricing, nothing more→ AI and personalization run as a dedicated layer, not bolted on plugins→ ERP, CRM, PIM, OMS connect via event-driven APIs not fragile point-to-point integrationsAnd the new frontier nobody's talking about enough: Zero-Click Commerce.AI agents are starting to shop on behalf of consumers. They don't browse. They decide. If your prod
Why third not second?
I need to create a Segment for Abandon Rate where customer did not purchased or ordered product after checkout process.I created an segment however need your help to understand if this correct? HITSExclude (HITSVISITSProduct Views exists- THEN -Cart Additions exists- THEN -Cart Views exists- THEN -Checkouts exists- THEN -Orders exists)- AND -VISITSHITSProduct Views exists- THEN -HITSCart Additions exists- THEN -HITSCart Views exists- THEN -HITSCheckouts exists- THEN Within 1 Hit(s) -HITSPage exists- THEN -Exclude (HITSPage exists)
AEM Multi-tenant Website: Restrict cq:tags for User Groups by SourcedCode.com (Brian Ka Sing Li) Overview Of most common multi-tenant websites, user groups are used to determine what AEM content authors can make changes to. The most popular requirement for a multi-tenant website is the ability to only edit tags for a specific brand. In this case, the way you can achieve this is by permissions. In this blog, we will ensure that all “WKND Members” will be able to create, read, update, and delete nodes under /content/cq:tags/wknd-shared, while these members will not be able to read any other tags listed under /content/cq:tags/*. Click here to learn more: https://sourcedcode.com/blog/aem/aem-multi-tenant-website-restrict-cqtags-for-user-groups
Congratulations to @Wilson-Faure for your recognition as our AEM Champion of the Month for April! 🙌 🤩Wilson has one of the most loyal fan bases of any AEM expert I know. On top of being wicked smart with Adobe Experience Cloud products, his generosity with his time and kind personality make him a true force within the community. As a Champion, he always goes the extra mile by hosting a User Group meeting, sharing best practices with customers, and, dare I say, "stealing the show" at the karaoke bar?!Wilson, thank you for being you. We’re so happy to have you as an Adobe Champion! 👏
We’re currently evaluating an enterprise API migration strategy for an AEM Cloud implementation and wanted to get input from teams that already went through something similar.Historically, our downstream AEM services relied on a middleware layer that handled:response transformation, field normalization, validation mappings, and compatibility logic for consuming components.Now that we’re moving closer to direct enterprise API consumption, we’re debating whether it’s better to:Introduce a transformation/adaptor layer temporarily to preserve compatibility for existing AEM services/componentsORRefactor all consuming services directly against the new API contractMain concerns are:scalability, long-term maintainability, regression testing effort, performance overhead, and dependency coordination across multiple teams.Would be interested in hearing how other enterprise AEM Cloud teams approached this tradeoff in production environments.
While exploring Adobe Analytics MCP integrations, one question that came to mind was around method-level access control and governance.For teams directly connecting MCP with tools like Claude or ChatGPT:Is there currently any way to provide granular access to specific MCP methods? For example, can access be restricted so certain user groups can only use selected MCP tools/methods?This becomes more interesting from an enterprise perspective, especially if future MCP capabilities expand toward:creating reports modifying variables deleting configurations other administrative operationsCurious to know how others are currently thinking about:MCP guardrails monitoring MCP usage internal governance approval workflows controlled MCP integrationsI was also exploring an OAuth/API-based MCP approach where an internally hosted middleware layer could potentially help with additional monitoring, validations, logging, or custom guardrails before executing MCP methods.I also created a small document w
Is anyone else experiencing issues with updating Report Builder queries this morning? I keep get an error message saying that “Segments are currently available”
Description - (I am sure this has been asked many times, so I just wanted to revive the idea) We need an automatic "Previous Period" date range component that automatically creates a dynamic lookback window relative to the selected date range on the panel. Why is this feature important to you It is basically not practicable to have fixed previous date range components in place that only work until one changes the panel date range. Example Freeform table using the last 7 full days (Panel date range) vs the previous 7 days (custom date range in the workspace project). Now, someone decides to change the date range on the panel to "last 30 full days" Result the custom date range still displays only 7 days, the rest is 0 the comparability between panel date range and freeform table is completely useless this becomes even more obvious / erroneous if you are applying a summary change visualization on the two columns, not taking the same number of data points into consideration Ho
We should have the option to disable / remove the opt-out link in scheduled projects. We’re sending scheduled projects to distribution lists with 200+ recipients. But we can’t manually add 200+ recipients in the Adobe scheduler efficiently. Therefore we only have a single email address in the scheduler (an internal distribution list).Here’s the issue: everyone receives the same scheduled project containing the same opt-out link. If only one person of the 200 recipients clicks on the opt-out link the whole distribution list is removed from the scheduler which this is stopping the scheduled report for the whole list on almost a daily basis.
Welcome to the VERY FIRST edition of the Workfront Wire! This is your new monthly roundup built just for Workfront customers. Think of this as your one-stop-shop for the latest news, updates, events, and everything happening across the Workfront world. Each month, we’ll bring you what’s new, what’s next, and what you should know to get the most out of Workfront, without having to dig for it. Let’s get into it, and we’ll see you again next month for the next edition of the Wire. Adobe Summit: 4 Key Workfront Announcements You Should Know Last week at Adobe Summit, Workfront announced FOUR key updates focused on AI-driven workflow execution, enterprise operations, and more connected planning and review experiences: Workflow Optimization Agent: AI that turns ideas and documents into structured plans, automates updates, speeds approvals, and delivers cross-system insights in Workfront. AI Collaborators: Invokes an existing agent to execute work, leveraging instructions and context,
I am pulling a Task report and grouping by Project Name. One particular project meets the filter criteria, but I can’t figure out why it isn’t pulling into the report. Can someone please look at the screenshots and tell me what I’m missing? Filter Criteria Project Details - none of these tasks for this user are showing in the report, but meets the criteria. All of the other Projects for her are capture here, best I can tell. But I’m afraid if this one is missing, others may be too.
I am trying to add aria-label to rte link plugin. I have added it but its getting stripped even after adding the value to the xss protection config. How to solve this.
We are curious if anyone has done the following in Fusion with Outlook: Receive a new email to a targeted email address in Outlook When the email hits the inbox, have Fusion read the email and download all attachments and once downloaded have the attachments move to targeted project folder We have a use case where we might also need to have a new folder created and then have files uploaded from the outlook email Can Fusion read metadata off the email to create a folder?
Hi,I am seeing an issue on trying to load a custom js on Adaptive form (edit/preview mode) on AEM author instance, but the same custom js is loading fine on AEM publisher.Adaptive form in created on AEM 6.5.24 and using foundation component.The custom js is located here: /apps/<project_name>/clientlibs/clientlib-adaptive-forms/custom.jsI want to initiate this custom.js on a button click on adaptive form.So in the rule editor for the button, I see an error, on trying to search for the custom function within custom.js. It shows as undefined variable. The reason is that, the custom.js is not loading on both edit/preview mode.All the files within this /apps/<project_name>/clientlibs is not loading on AEM author, but the it loads fine when the adaptive form in published on aem publisher?Any suggestions please?
How can we determine that on browser network tab (or so) if the a content is rendered via AJO web channel ?
Hi WF Community,Based on what I’ve read, I don’t believe you can automatically have a custom form attached to documents that users add to a record. I know you can for project, task and issue records, but I just wanted to do a gut check here to ensure I’m not missing a feature.Thanks!Nick
I am looking for options to integrate Marketo with Microsoft teams for webinars. We are using Marketo forms for registering people and we want form submissions automatically register people into the correct Teams webinar (we are using Teams Premium), allow Teams to send access and reminder emails. And from Marketo we send confirmation email just after form fill. If possible get attendance statuses back to Marketo for post-webinar engagement. But main pain point is automatic registration for now.Currently, webinar registrations and attendee management involve manual operational effort- we export the registrants list from Marketo then import it in Teams.Please let me know what would be the best option for integration and any insight you can share on this. Thanks!
Hi Marketo Community!👋 I recently worked on implementing Marketo's Predictive Content and wanted to share my learnings, challenges, and use cases — hoping this helps others who are exploring the same! --- 🎯 WHAT I IMPLEMENTED:1. Recommendation Bar on Landing Pages2. Email ContentAI3. Rich Media Widget --- 📋 SETUP — KEY REQUIREMENTS:✅ RTP Script — Must be placed in <head> tag, after <meta> tags✅ Content Discovery — ON✅ URL Patterns — Map URLs to Categories✅ Domain Configuration — All domains must be added in Admin → Web Personalization✅ Content Pieces — Minimum 10 approved pieces recommended✅ Algorithm — Set to Clicks or Conversions --- 🔴 CHALLENGES I FACED & HOW I SOLVED THEM:1️⃣ Bar not showing after initial test → RTP won't re-fire for same visitor → Fix: Test in fresh browser session2️⃣ URL Domain mismatch → Sandbox domain (mktoweb.com) was not added → Fix: Added domain in Admin → Web Personalization → Domain Configuration3️⃣ viewedTypes was empty → Visitor had n
Hi Team, We are sending data to Event hub Destination and the source of the records are streaming. We have observed that even after profiles no longer meet the audience criteria, records are still being sent to the destination (at least for the first occurrence after exit).After reviewing the Adobe documentation on Profile Export Behavior, it appears that this is expected behavior in AEP for enterprise streaming destinations.Profile export behavior | Adobe Experience PlatformHas anyone encountered a similar scenario earlier? If so, could you please suggest any potential workaround or best practices to handle this? Thanks in Advance Regards,Mustufa Momin
I’ve been running SEO and backlink experiments for DentPrime using different platforms within the Adobe ecosystem — including public project pages, shared assets, PDF links, portfolios, and other Adobe-hosted content.The issue is that none of the backlinks I created through Adobe applications appear in:SEMrush Google Search ConsoleEven after waiting for indexing and checking crawlability, these links still don’t show up.This raises several technical SEO questions:Are Adobe-generated backlinks automatically tagged as nofollow, ugc, or otherwise ignored? Does Adobe block crawler access through robots.txt or JavaScript rendering? Could these links exist in a way that Google can crawl but chooses not to report? Are SEO tools like SEMrush unable to detect links inside Adobe-hosted environments? Do Adobe apps create temporary, sandboxed, or non-indexable URLs? Has anyone successfully tracked backlinks from Adobe Express, Behance, Adobe Portfolio, Acrobat shared documents, or similar services
Is there any hack to be able to show a calendar at the gantt view level to not show everyday in the month and just consolidate to a week or even a month view? This gantt view is not helpful to me because you have to dooms scroll to see how and where they overlap for a multi month program. the visual is not great.
I’m working on a document report with filtering for documents on tasks titled “Engineering Review” that are pending a task approval. I’m filtering out the process guides that are on the tasks, and would like to have these results span across multiple programs in the same portfolio. My text mode filter is:AND:1:name=ApproverAND:1:name_Mod=notcontainsAND:2:name=ReviewerAND:2:name_Mod=notcontainsname=Process Guidename_Mod=notcontainsproject:portfolioID=XXXXXXXproject:programID=XXXXXXXproject:status=CURtask:name=Engineering Reviewtask:name_Mod=cicontainstask:pendingApproval=truetaskID_Mod=notblank(Works great for just one program)I’ve attempted to add an additional program ID as “project:programID=XXXXXXX,XXXXXXX” or as “OR:1:project:programID=XXXXXXX” in text mode. Neither has worked thus far. Am I off base for thinking that filtering multiple programs is possible? Any insights are appreciated.
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.