Explore product-specific spaces to ask questions, share insights, and learn best practices.
Recently active
Hi Everyone! I have set up a template using the new email builder. I made sure it looks good in both light mode and dark mode. However, when we use that template to create an actual email asset, the dark mode does not keep the styling that we originally dictated once we paste in new content. Sometimes I can paste in content and dark mode displays as I’ve set it to, but sometimes I paste in content and it just completely messes up dark mode. I have tried copying/pasting directly from the Excel file with the content. I’ve tried copying and selecting “paste and match style” to keep the style of the Marketo text box I’m pasting into. I’ve also tried copying/pasting into Sublime to strip the formatting, then copying/pasting from Sublime into Marketo. None of these processes made a difference. Dark mode always displays incorrectly. We shouldn’t have to (and it’s not sustainable to) re-style the dark mode for every single email. If there is a text block that’s already been styled in both ligh
The standard endpoints used to export results do not support returning the specific test variant details for A/B-tested emails. When an email is part of an A/B test, the API returns the generic value "Whole Emails Test."This value identifies that the email belongs to an A/B test group, but it does not indicate whether the email was Variant A or Variant B. As a result, the specific variant cannot be determined using the results.I understand that this information is important for your use case. However, at the moment, we do not have an API endpoint that can identify whether an email belongs to Variant A or Variant B.
We would like to be able to determine how many times a webhook is called in past 30/60/90 days. We can get the people that were affected by the webhook, but because the webhook could process more than one person, the two are not equal. We want to see this to determine how frequently these webhooks are being called.
It’s not ideal to have to type “confirm” each time you want to update a field value. For some fields we have 20+ values that need to be updated. It would be better to unlock all of the values for a field after confirming once.Also, the process of confirming itself is not intuitive. It’s not obvious that you need to type “confirm” instead of the updated value itself. It would be better to have a “Confirm” button.
Dear Adobe Team,we are currently in transition from AA to CJA and are migration a ton of workspace to from AA to CJA.However the process is currently not really perfect as only CJA Admins can be chosen as Owner of the dashboard and its elements.We are aware of the workaround of first put the ownership on an admin. transfer the workspace and then later use Asset Transfer in CJA to set the real owner of the workspace but this is problematic and error prone as identifying all assets which ownership should also change is a lot of manual work.i guess that is also a problem for other admins that are in the transition and want to make as easy for the previous AA users the transition to CJA in having full access to their workspace as the workload explodes by only having CJA Admins and not CJA User as Owner ins transfer available.KRMarc
I find where I spend most of my time utilizing the log in as feature is on testing new reports - specifically ones where $$USER.ID is involved.I think it would be super helpful if there was a button for admins on the Report Actions to have a “View Report As” feature that allows admin’s to preview a report as a specific user to save all of the clicks between setup and reports.
I get an error in the Journey canvas about missing opt out link in the email body. Se attached image. This is not correct - since there is a opt out link present in a Footer fragment in the same template. The opt out link i coded in the fragment, and are present in the same way with the same ID-s that is needed for the link to work. But for some reason this manually coded link is not recognized as a out out link when AJO checks the code/template. Se picture of the code with the link. It would be nice if manually placed code also could be recognized when it is actually the same code that AJO is creating. This is an unnecessary error message that cases a lot of confusion.
Users have high-priority need to take a Request that has been converted to a Project (using a specific template) and create a second project (with a different template) out of the original Issue/Request. Users would be able to browse from Request list and see all projects created from original request.
Description - The current functionality for routing rules is very limited. We are only able to configure routing rules for specific queue topics. Allowing us to assign specific user/teams to a specific queue topic. The following is functionality that is possible through Fusion, but want to be available without Fusion: 1. Automatically Convert Requests/Issue into a Project If a request is submitted through a specific queue topic, then automatically convert the request into a project using a specific project template. Ideally, we would also have the ability to configure this at the custom form level. e.g. If the requester selects XYZ on the request form, then convert into a project using XYZ template. If the requester selects ABC on the request form, then convert into a project using ABC template. 2. Dynamic Request Routing Based on how the Form was CompletedSimilar to #1, allow us to set routing rules based on how the request form was completed. If c
Batch Campaigns can have the status “Scheduled to run”, and you can filter for this status. Thing is, that this is in fact not their current status. These campaigns ran a year ago, yet the status is not updated. Once you click on them, Marketo recognizes the current status and removes it from the filter.I consider this a bug, and I think the status of scheduled campaign should automatically be set to “Has run” after it has run.And on a side note: If you want to archive a program that has Smart Campaigns in it that are in the “Scheduled to run” status - even if that’s not true - you can’t archive. Marketo will display this error message:
To reduce the risk of accidental interruptions, we recommend moving the Schedule Sandbox Refresh button from the main Workfront page to the Setup menu.Keeping this action button on the main page makes it easy for users who are not involved in the refresh process to unintentionally cancel or modify a scheduled refresh, which could directly impact planned activities.Since refreshes are typically coordinated internally by the team before execution, placing this option under the Setup menu provides an additional layer of protection, ensuring that only authorized users performing configuration tasks can access it and significantly reducing the likelihood of accidental changes.
I would like there to be a global Workload Balancer setting that automatically hides ON HOLD or DEAD projects without applying status-based filter criteria or needing to update the project tasks so they don’t qualify. Similar to the how completed work can be removed from the Workload Balancer through the Show completed work setting, it would be ideal if there was a Show Dead or On Hold work setting that could be toggled off once in settings rather than having to add criteria [Project: Status -- Does not equal -- Dead, On Hold] to all Workload Balancer active project filters to exclude these projects. USE CASE: When an in-flight project is cancelled or put on hold, setting its status to DEAD or ON HOLD allows the Project Owner to freeze the project where it was in its progress without having to complete or clear the qualifying tasks to remove them from showing in the Workload Balancer. That way if the project happens to come back to life down the line, the remaining tasks are still set
The feature that automatically auto tags images in a document needs to be disabled for every user, or the tagging needs to be manual to eliminate obscene language from the tagging. I have an abstract image in my template that I send to clients. If I forget to disable the auto tagging, then the client will read a caption that suggests I am sending them a nude image. There is no figure in the graphic. There is no suggestion of a figure in the graphic, but Ai suggest that there is, and it confuses my clients. Even if it says that it is an “Ai generated caption”, my clients read it as something I, myself, inserted into their document. I have turned it off. I have done it multiple times, successfully. However, I do not love that it is my sole responsibility to work around a program every single time I send out a document. Please let me know if there is a way to disable this function so that I can forget about the fact it even exists. My clients are older and I have to explain to them ever
Problem StatementIn Workfront, users submit requests through the system and may need to coordinate with colleagues in other departments on the same request. Today, if a user wants another person to be engaged in the request conversation, the most common process is to wait until after the request is created and then manually add an @ mention in the Updates section.This creates friction and can lead to communication occurring outside the request context—especially when users choose an easier workaround.Current WorkaroundAfter creating the request, users go to the Updates area and @ tag the relevant person.However, many users find it easier to:open the email notification they received for the request, and forward that email to the teammate in the other department.As a result, communication is no longer centralized in Workfront, and the “single source of truth” for the request is reduced.Proposed EnhancementCreate a field type (or input capability) that allows users to @ tag/mention others
We use Apache CXF for SOAP and REST clients on AEM 6.5.2 LTS and install the necessary bundles in AEM. Currently we are forced to use Apache CXF 3.3.13, which was released in March 2022, because AEM still ships with org.apache.servicemix.specs.saaj-api-1.3, and newer versions of Apache CXF require saaj-api-1.4. There are a number of security vulnerabilities in Apache CXF that have since been patched since 2022 that we would like to remediate, see https://cxf.apache.org/security-advisories.html. Our goal would be to install Apache CXF 3.6.x, currently 3.6.10, as that is still actively supported, but the old SAAJ API is preventing us from doing that, see javax.xml.soap,version=[1.4,2) -- Cannot be resolved: Our ask is for AEM to upgrade to saaj-api-1.4, which would unblock us from upgrading Apache CXF.I can provide a full list of bundle JARs that we install related to Apache CXF if needed.
If you've ever launched a large-scale campaign and watched your call center buckle under a flood of responses — or worse, seen your email deliverability tank because ISPs flagged you for sending too much too fast — wave sending in Adobe Journey Optimizer (AJO) is the feature you need to know about.In this post, I'll walk through what wave sending is, when to use it, and how to configure it effectively for real-world scenarios.What Is Wave Sending?Wave sending lets you split a single campaign's audience into multiple batches (called "waves") and deliver them on a staggered schedule. Instead of blasting your entire audience at once, you control the pace — sending in 2 to 10 waves, each with its own size and timing.This applies to all outbound actions in AJO: Email, SMS, Push, and Direct Mail. Why Should You Care?Three words: control, reputation, and capacity.1. Protect Your Sender ReputationISPs watch your sending patterns closely. A sudden spike in volume from a domain or IP can trigger
Adding an Employee ID field to the user profile would be a valuable enhancement for organizations that rely on unique employee identifiers across multiple systems.In our environment, duplicate names are fairly common, making it difficult to distinguish between users. An Employee ID field would provide a reliable way to identify the correct person and improve data accuracy.This would be especially helpful in Fusion integrations that map Workfront user information to Salesforce, where we often need a unique identifier rather than a user name.It would also be great if the Employee ID field could be added as a selectable column in user views and reports, enabling administrators to easily reference and validate user records.I hope that you will consider this enhancement request.
Currently there is no API endpoint to get the Flow details of a campaign. This is also a blocker in MCP as well since the it works based on REST API. Complete Campaign QA cannot be completed without flow details.
I recently created an SDR within the AA workspace project. The thinking is that users should be encouraged to use the AA workspace tool as much as possible, as compared to generating an excel based SDR that has to be stored externally. Some examples of what I built 1) a picture of the different sections of the SDR - 2) a picture of the different panels, one for each variable (props illustrated) indicated its number, its name and whether or not the variable is enabled 3) an overview of a specific variable details. I get that there are some items in this example that might not be easy to automate, like the BRD reference number with a hyperlink, but I think it would be great to have a tool in the AA admin areas that would generate an SDR template within Workspace grabbing all the information it can from the AA admin area report suite traffic and conversion variable screens. UX: The admin would click a button, the script wo
It would be helpful to have the option to display the updates in order by the last update made. When reply is added to an older update, it is difficult to search for because the original post is displayed way down the update feed. When a reply is made to an older comment, it would be nice to have it move to the top, truly in order of last update, be it original or a response.
The new green pop-ups at the bottom of the screen when task status is modified, such as if you click work on it the pop-up says “You’ve started working on this. The status is now in progress.” or when you remove your assignment it says “You’ve stopped working on this, the status is now new” are persistent and must be manually dismissed by users even after navigating to other objects. While having the pop-up is helpful for confirmation, we need the ability to have those auto-dismiss after a few seconds or at least have it disappear when moving to a different object in Workfront.We have users who are moving quickly through the system who now feel disrupted by having to click another item to dismiss after already clicking to change the task. They often move on quickly until these pile up at the bottom of their screen, then have to dismiss each individually. Which a large volume of work as is, any extra clicks are cumbersome to users. Thank you so much!
Hi! for clients (even sometimes for us) is confusing to see this numbers in AJO journey canvas:It would be great if somewhere in node card mention which numbers corresponds to previous execution (for example, yesterday) and which ones to actual execution. Regards.
I recently started receiving incessant in-app notifications when a team to which I'm assigned receives a work request. They look like this: [Person] wants your team, [Team], to work on this task. Many members of our department are assigned to multiple teams, causing each of us to receive dozens of notifications per day--even per hour--for new assignments that rarely apply to us. I'm told there's no way to opt out of these in-app notifications. Please add a way to opt out of certain notification types--or at least turn these off again (as they have been since we started using Workfront a year and a half ago).
What is Context7?It's an open-source MCP server from Upstash that pulls current, version-specific docs and real code examples for a library straight into your AI assistant's context - instead of the model relying on whatever it memorized at training time.Where I use it:Inside Cursor and Claude Code, whenever I'm generating code against a fast-moving SDK — so the assistant reasons against today's API surface, not the one that existed at its training cutoff.Here's the real example:Asked Cursor to implement session caching with Upstash Redis — it generated hmset, which looked correct but was already deprecated.Added Context7 via MCP, and Cursor pulled the latest SDK docs and switched to the correct hset API.AI can write code. MCP helps it write code with current context.Key takeaways:AI assistants hallucinate silently on deprecated APIs — that's the dangerous kind Training-data cutoff is the biggest hidden risk in AI-assisted development MCP turns "probably right" into "verified against c
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
