Build better products with our product team
Description - My organization can't set up the SharePoint Graph API integration since the set up requires my organization Admin Approval to allow Workfront to access SharePoint, rather than using a predefined set up as used in SharePoint Integration legacy set up. My organization only uses the predefined set up to grant app access. Can a predefined set up be available to access SharePoint Graph API? Why is this feature important to you - We would like to use SharePoint for documents
Description:Enabling CMYK color code for docs uploading in Proofing environment.Why is this feature important to you:We at Disney use Workfront for request and approval process of both digital and physical designs. We recently noticed the difference in colors in the PDF or JPEG uploaded to WorkFront so we created ticket to Adobe experience league. The issue was identified that we use CMYK color code for our proofs whereas Workfront only supports RGB. The common solution provided to this was to embed the RGB color code to the proof, but we cannot to do that in our case. As mentioned, the documents are used for both digital and physical printing purposes and the print media team only accept CMYK color coded designs.How would you like the feature to work:Our request would be to add the color code to Workfront Proof environment and deviate the color differences. As a developer, I know this is a big ask, but this issue stops the utmost necessity of using Workfront in our company with around more than 1000 users.Current Behaviour:Noticeable color variation in proofsAlternate Solutions:We are happy to hear any other solution for this issue.Timeline:Also, we would love to know if this request is being taken into consideration and the timeline for the change if approved.Attachements:We have attached some samples for reference. Case#00381284 Thanks,Abisheik MS,FileMaker and WorkFront Support,Disney Music Groups.
Need the proofing in Workfront to support all print CMYK documents for printing. Printers do not use RGB. Colors look different in in RGB and in CMYK and when proofing in WF need to see/proof the file correctly. And why does it look good in Adobe Acrobat and different in Adobe Work Front, they’re both Adobe products.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Custom Author environments' domains Use-case: custom author domains not available - hard for the dev and business teams to use the system Current/Experienced Behavior: https://experienceleague.adobe.com/docs/experience-manager-cloud-service/implementing/author-tier/accessing-the-author-tier.html?lang=en Improved/Expected Behavior: We need to have author domains customized as we do have for publishes Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloudservice Customer-name/Organization name: ABB Information Systems LTD Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - As a system admin, my team and I really like the look of the new home screen. However we have been reluctant to roll it out because we don't have control over which widgets can appear and the filters and views we use in our dashbord reporting don't translate to the widgets. Giving the group admin greater granular control over the home screen and how it appears (through the use of layout templates) would allow us to lean in and scale this for our users. Why is this feature important to you - As a system admin we need to be able to efficiently support our users. The ability to control what individual users or use cases see allow us to effectively and efficiently target our support. If end users are able to configure their home screen any which way, support becomes very challenging over a large number of users. Consistency of experience is key. How would you like the feature to work - I would like the new home screen to be a function of the layout template functionality. I would like to be able to control what widgets our different use cases can pull into their home screen and provide default selections, and leverage existing views and filters. This is not currently the case. Current Behaviour - You get what you get and you don't get up set. Currently, there is no control over what widgets end users have access to, and the majority of filters and views created and shared are not available. There is also no current functionality for the new home at the layout template level. Additionally, the new home is an enterprise instance level feature. It would be helpful to be able to turn this on and off at the group level.
In the Workload Balancer, tasks only show in teal = planning and green = current. It would be helpful to distinguish "ready to start" tasks vs "not ready to start" tasks. Resource Managers want to use the Workload Balancer to see which tasks can be reassigned to help even out workloads among the team.
Clear indication of which specific tasks or other factors are causing a project status to be “At Risk” - this is often a guessing game
Next to the request of having a WYSIWG Description in the Task, one of our main pain points is, that we cannot setup Parent & Child projects. Already in 2017 someone has brought that up (https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/workfront-ideas/parent-child-projects/idi-p/520427) but nothing happened although the idea had over 500 likes. Let me shortly describe why this would be so important. We have several customers that work with a year-to-year development budget. Means it is too much for only having one project in Workfront. But it is also no solution to have several projects with no connection as we need the summary of hours, budgets etc. and additionally to that a Gantt that shows all relevant tasks of the different projects. Thinking one step further, this Gantt should then also be able to be shared with the customer. I am really curious if something like that is on the roadmap otherwise I am confronted with 20 project managers who all look for additional software in order to map this. And at the end of the day, it becomes inevitable to ask the question about the right overall solution.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - Users currently see all statuses in the system (including statuses from inactive groups) when using a prompt. This is a poor user experience when they see numerous statuses that they don't recognize.How would you like the feature to work - Limit the statuses that appear to System Statuses and statuses from groups the user belongs to. Current Behaviour - All statues in the system appear, regardless of which group the status belongs to and even statuses from deactived groups currently appear, making the drop-down list much longer & more confusing than it needs to be for end users.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: We observed that the ON/OFF Time OOTB- feature is not getting horned on dynamic media-enabled assets. Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: Improved/Expected Behavior: Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): 6.5.12 AMS Customer-name/Organization name: Intel Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: OTB Workflow triggering Email service as assets are pushed from Brand Portal to AEM are incorrect. Use-case: The default workflow when pushing assets from Brand Portal to AEM has the following status - 1. The contribution folder asset-sourcing-test is queued for publish to AEM.2. The contribution folder asset-sourcing-test is successfully published to AEM.The 2nd mail comes even if the Asset Contribution Status in Brand Portal is marked as "Failed" in Status. This is incorrect as it gives user the perception that the push from Brand Portal to AEM is successful. Current/Experienced Behavior: Current mail states " The contribution folder asset-sourcing-test is successfully published to AEM." Improved/Expected Behavior: The mail should state that " The contribution folder asset-sourcing-test failed in publishing to AEM. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS - 2023.11.14227.20231108T162349Z Customer-name/Organization name: TA Digital Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: There was an update a while back which changed the functionality of content sets copy tool to continue and succeed even if there is an issue with a given path. This is not an ideal change as we rely on Content Copy statuses to do certain things like notify our users when a path fails and we are now receiving false positives. We would like the option to return the functionality to how it was before which is to give a status of fail and cancel the copy if there is an issue with the path or the path does not exist Use-case: Routine Content Copy Current/Experienced Behavior: Copy succeeds even if path does not exist Improved/Expected Behavior: Copy should fail if path does not exist or issue with a given path Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMCS Customer-name/Organization name: Chipotle Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Be able to bulk edit smart cropping of images Current/Experienced Behavior: Users need to select each image one by one and then enter the smart crop editor to adjust. Doing this for 100 images one after the other is time-consuming. Improved/Expected Behavior: User selects 50 assets in bulk --> Smart crop --> Adjust the smart cropping on all assets --> Save All Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Assets Cloud service (latest version) Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Case Insensitive Asset Upload in AEM Use-case: Currently, if we upload assets - abc.pdf and ABC.PDF - They are treated as different assets in AEM (Your local machine's storage parses it in case insensitive manner)The JCR stores the nodes abc.pdf and ABC.PDF as 2 distinct nodes. Most storage systems even in different OS (Mac | Windows) store files by default in case insensitive manner. Current/Experienced Behavior: The assets are treated as different due to their case difference. Improved/Expected Behavior: The assets should be treated as similar and versioning popup should be displayed. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): 2023.11.14227.20231108T162349Z Customer-name/Organization name: TA Digital Screenshot (if applicable): N.A Code package (if applicable): N.A
Description - We would like the ability to bulk update our schedules with the appropriate public holidays. Or have it set automatically.Why is this feature important to you - Without this feature, Administrators who use schedules for this need to manually go through each one an update. We personally have about 30 active across our region alone to maintain.How would you like the feature to work - Highlight the required schedules (from a report or the like), and update using a drop down menu.Current Behaviour - We have to manually update each one with the same exception dates.
Description - Updates Section in the Project and Task Level to have option to Add Table in Rows and Column wiseWhy is this feature important to you - We receive lot of data in tabular from from Internal teams on email and while we want to share that with someone through Workfront , we have to convert that table into image and upload in document , which is double taskHow would you like the feature to work - we will copy the table with data from email and paste it in the update sections Current Behaviour - We are making screenshot of table cells from email and adding it in document section , which is creating multiple images and not acting as a chain Description - Program name to appear at "Issue" FormWhy is this feature important to you - We have a form created at Issue level , there is a field called Program name and we want that field to auto populate with the program that project associated with currently Program name can be only pulled at project level by adding custom form and not at issue level , at the backend we tried with adding the formula , but the object it was taking is only Project How would you like the feature to work - Program name to auto populate at Issue form Current Behaviour -
Currently, Workfront utilizes the time zone on the user's computer to determine the times and dates for tasks versus the setup time zone within Workfront for the user. We are finding issues with this in a few locations within Workfront. For example, in the Time Off section, if the user's setup time zone within Workfront is not set to the same time zone as their computer, it will select 2 days when trying to select 1. Another example, if a user is located on the West coast and their computer is set to PST, but their Workfront time zone is set to EST, it will override the EST and use the computer's time zone. This is especially difficult for Planners that are setting up due dates and times for tasks within a project. We'd like to set all users to EST, regardless of where are they are located in the world.
Description - The "My Updates" view/feature that allows users to streamline the review and response of mentions in creative proofs. What would take this feature to the next level is if a user could reply to comments made in creative proofs within the same view/window without it opening a proof in a new window to respond. Why is this feature important to you - When looking at multiple proofs - it is time consuming to open each proof to then respond to a mention. Some mentions invoke a response but do not require viewing. This would make communication a lot fast and easier. How would you like the feature to work - Would like to respond to the in-proof mention in the "My Updates" window. Current Behavior - Currently it transfers you to a new window opening the proof. The action button says "respond in proof". It would be better to have the option to "respond" or "respond in proof".
Description - It would be absolutely great to have a possibility to trigger Adobe Fusion directly from within Workfront. Why is this feature important to you - This would give Fusion users more flexibility on how to start a scenario and provide the end user to run custom actions on tasks, projects, documents, ... How would you like the feature to work - As most objects have the "three-dots"-button to initiate misc. operations like edit, convert, move, share, ..., it would be nice to setup an additional entry here, which just calls a specific webhook in Fusion passing the ID of the object to start a scenario in Fusion on this object id.Another approach could be, to have a button as new field type for custom forms, which can call such a webhook. Current Behaviour - Currently a scenario can include a "watcher" module to monitor field changes which trigger a scenario. This uses the Event Subscription API.
I would like to know how to configure the debugger so that when inspecting event objects, I do not need to manually expand the payload.How do I do that?
Description - To use the request queue as a serious alternative for a helpdesk system, it would be helpful to be able to define, which user group can see a queue topic / topic group Why is this feature important to you - This would allow us to create a request queue as our IT helpdesk system with the ability to control, who can send requests like hardware orders, or send on and offboarding request for user accounts How would you like the feature to work - The ability to decide for each queue topic / topic group, if it is visible for all users who have access to the request queue, or only for specific groups Current Behaviour - As far as I understand currently it would be necessary to create several request queues, which leads to the fact, that the first dropdown can get confusing very fast
Description -I am working on internal sites that are built for our organization. All these internal sites are being tracked using Adobe Analytics under same Account name but have different report suites. Therefore, we have mutliple report suites under one Account. I want manage users for each of the report suites using APIs as I can then automate/schedule the managing user list. As of now I have to go to individual report suites and manage the users or go to indivisual users and manage their permissions. Why is this feature important to you -This will help me in automating and adding or deleting users from the whitelist created for each of the report suites under singly account. How would you like the feature to work -I should be able to write a python script that will pull list of users with their permission from a CSV or tab delimited and add to the desired report suite. Current Behaviour -Right now we use Admin console and not APIs. Managing users happen at group level, account level but not at report suite level.
We are requesting an "Adobe Detected" (VISTA) rule for Social Network traffic referrals. We are in the process of updating our marketing channel classifications and have observed that our social channel rules need updating. We currently use "Adobe Detected" rules for other channels, like Paid Search and Natural Search, and we're interested in seeing these "Adobe Detected" rules extend to Social Networks.Given the dynamic nature of social networks, having an "Adobe Detected" rule specific to Social Network traffic would improve our ability to stay up-to-date with new platforms, rather than requiring us to manually update this list each time a new platform is introduced. This would streamline our efforts and ensure more accurate channel classifications.
Description - We would like to show the planned hours per task in the My Tasks widget. Why is this feature important to you - It is important to see the planned hours assigned.How would you like the feature to work - Add an option to the 'View' for showing the Planned hours. And, of course, the 'duration type' of the task must be considered.Current Behaviour - This is not an option at the moment.
Description - Workfront's API does not use the default standard for OAuth2 Authorization Code Flow. Using out-of-the-box tools available in Integration Platforms or Microsoft Power Platform or other web frameworks is not possible because these solutions expect OAuth2 Authorization Code Flow to use access_token as a Bearer token returned via the and not as sessionID.Why is this feature important to you - There is an increase in development cost and maintenance when creating or connecting third-party apps to Workfront via the Workfront API because of the non-standard OAuth implementation. Limits or even prevents our ability to continue orchestrating and automating work by placing Workfront at the center of our operations.How would you like the feature to work - Ultimately, we would like to be able to use the access_token as part of the Authorization Header as a Bearer token described in the OAuth and standards documentation. This would mean that the token_type be set to Bearer (default, industry standard) and not sessionID (custom Workfront, non-standard) and for subsequent API calls to handle this appropriately.OAuth 2.0 Bearer Token UsageRFC 6750 - The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: Bearer Token Usage (ietf.org)Current Behaviour - Workfront’s OAuth API implementation is non-standard, in that once you’ve gone through the usual Authorization Code Flow, the access_token needs to go in the Request Header “sessionID” in each API call. This non-standard approach makes it very difficult and sometimes impossible to integrate with other third-party and custom built applications unless significant time is invested into workaround. In other cases we are left to use a fixed API Key, which isn’t ideal from a security perspective.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
