I want to hear from you! Which idea is most impor..

Jeremy, what are the chances that option 1 "Custom Field Validation" can cover DATE fields as opposed to text entry fields? Or, would that feature include date fields?

Date validation is a near-universal want that would benefit just about every customer; whereas text validation would only benefit a subset of customers.

Im going to go a little further with my take on ranked choice voting: I'd give them this order of importance:

1. (3) Projects Only from a Template
2. (2) Sequential Project Numbers
3. (1) Field Validation — I'm hoping this will be similar to "hashing" so I can ask for something like an Account Code in a specific format like "4 letters, 2 numbers, a dash, 5 numbers and dash, and a letter" or even better…allow for GREP pattern matching. Should be able to do "OR" in these pattern matches (for example, UPC can have a few different valid formats)
4. (4) Jump to Today — Honestly, every date picker I've ever seen has some variant of this…it shouldn't be in this list, it should be on some list of "basic things we forgot to implement at launch" to be done along with bugfixes and such.

Good to see someone looking into these QoL issues. :-)

Would the Custom Field Validation include Numbers? We have fields for department number and accounting codes that should be an exact number of digits, and though we specify in the Instructions ("enter the 7-digit department number"), users neglect to follow the instructions. Not a big deal, but would be great to have some add'l front-end validation as described.

So many great things here! I voted but some notes related to our use cases

• Sequential Project Numbers - this would save our resource person a lot of time
• a "Jump to Today" option - surprisingly I haven't heard the lack of this as a complaint from our users, but I feel a large number of them would love this - I know I would. Especially this time of year when I am setting some things up for next year, often within a project that is used perpetually and was created a year or more ago.
• Custom Field Validation - William's and Elena's use cases would be super helpful
• Require Users to Only Create Projects from a Template - our project managers are pretty good about using templates (we even have a "No Tasks" template to be sure fields on the Overview that can be pre-filled are filled in and that all necessary custom forms are attached. But if I had this option, I would definately still use it.

All four ideas are great and necessary features for us - would love to see them all on the roadmap.

If I‘d have to choose one it is the custom field validation. Our process owners constantly complain about lack of such a feature...

All 4 sound like great additions, our preference on order would be;

Require Users to Only Create Projects from a Template

Sequential Project Numbers

Custom Field Validation

a "Jump to Today" option

The only one that is a big need for us is the sequential project numbers. The other 3 aren't important to our case use at all (but I see others need it).

Three of the four are very important to my organization. I voted for the project number being sequential because this has been the single most confusing thing for us since moving to Workfront this past month. We are receive around 500-600 hundred requests each week that all turn into projects and our volume will grow exponentially once we implement our next service lines. For our customers, they need a consistent tracking number from start to finish. So for us, it is more about one consistent number that can follow through from request to project but also increment 1 number at a time. We have already seen our reference numbers grow so big we have to add more characters to our archiving system to be able to handle the reference number.

The custom field validation would help us in date fields and when needing a specific set of numbers to be entered on a form.

The projects from a template feature would be very nice to have but we currently manage with training of our staff. As we on-board more people it gets harder to manage user by user so it would be nice to lock it down.

@Amy Stella‚ Late to the party, but wanted to throw this out there:

Would the field validations throw errors in Kickstart? Currently we're having to manage macros on our spreadsheet to force these fields into a format we need once in Workfront. But as Workfront doesn't trigger an error for these things, and copy/pasting into the Kickstart doc can override macros, we are left with a potential for error. If the Custom Form has these "rules" in certain fields, it would be awesome if the Import would flag those issues with those fields, so that the user importing the info would catch anything missed on their sweep before it was in the system.

Thanks all!

Angie

With the field validation, I would like to also be able to enter "other data" within rules.

Example, for a date field, I would like the ability to enter NA text to indicate the date isn't required. Right now we have to leave it blank. The same would go for numbers.