Build better products with our product team
Description - Be able to control time allocation for Issues (like Tasks) so that issue time allocation is reflective of the estimated workload, not just the amount of bandwidth the assignee has available Why is this feature important to you - Issue time allocation not being represented accurately in Workload Balancer makes it impossible for us to resource properly to issues. How would you like the feature to work - Add Duration Type to Issues, so that like Tasks, we can change to Simple and control time allocation based on the time required. Current Behaviour - Currently the time allocations for Issues are completely dependent on the assignee's workload. If the assignee has more than 8 hours of work already, the assignee will be allocated less time for the issue than is actually estimated to complete.
Currently, it is my understanding that Iterations experience a burndown sync periodically (built into the system), or any time a manual sync in triggered. This results in Iterations that close without displaying accurate data on the burndown unless a member of the team manually syncs the burndown immediately prior to the Iteration closing. For large, international teams, this can be next to impossible. This functionality gap can leave incorrect data once an Iteration closes - for example it may show 45/50 equally weighted stories complete, making the Iteration 90% complete, however there are only 45 stories listed in the Iteration and completion should be 100% (45/45). Adding a sync immediately upon closing an Iteration, or continuing automatic syncs after closure could remedy this problem. This is important because it will allow agile teams to accurate monitor and report on their performance.
Description: An option for customers to select the RAID level used for data storage in their specific Adobe Campaign instance would put them in a place to set the appropriate security level for whatever level their company driven securities set as minimum standard.Why is the feature important for you: To adhere to our company internal IT Security Policies. Expected behaviour: A selection option within Admin Console or via support teams to set the desired RAID level. Current behaviour: Data storage configs are pre-set for all customers without any option to individualise on instance level.
Description - can you please create an email that culminates all proofs i need to review that are outstanding to make it easier on my team? also just a landing page of all the proofs they need to review. Why is this feature important to you - frustrations from team on how to navigate easily and find all their proofs amongst 20 projects they are a part of. Also, can you make it easier to move between the different proofs like in frameIO even if they are between different projects? lots of clicking into and out of proofs happening.How would you like the feature to work - email that lists it all outCurrent Behaviour - work list option to view proofs, dashboard custom created for approvers but not UX friendly and can't be only a reviewer, they want to always go to one place where it's easy for them to understand what's they need to review
Self service flow step does not send Munchkin ID in its header. This prevents identifying the instance and providing the correct logic in return.Request you to please send Munchkin ID in the header, so we are able to identify the instance and provide appropriate logic. Thanks,Arvind
Description -Set the Month of Year dimension to be configured to each report suite's calendar type. Why is this feature important to you -We use the 4-5-4 for our report suites and this dimension is based on calendar year for the order. Other metrics like day of week adjust based on the calendar format set for the report suite. How would you like the feature to work -Set your date range to last year (according to NRF 4-5-4 Calendar). Rows for Month of year would be 1. February2. March3. April4. May5. June6. July7. August8. September9. October10. November11. December12. January Current Behavior -Set your date range to last year (according to NRF 4-5-4 Calendar). Rows for month of year would be 1. January2. February3. March4. April5. May6. June7. July8. August9. September10. October11. November12. December Link to my previous post with comments from Adobe team mentioning their thoughts on this recommendation (see comments): https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/adobe-analytics-questions/request-update-month-of-year-dimension-order-based-on-report/m-p/635868
Description - We want to be able to use the Text Markup tool on more file types.Why is this feature important to you - We use the Text Markup frequently on multiple proofs and want to use it on more file types.How would you like the feature to work - Exactly like it currently does, but on more file types (.png, .jpg, .txt, etc).Current Behaviour - This tool only seems to work on .docx and .pdf documents currently.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary :Currently, Card view in AEM Assets is staggered. Metadata displayed on the card as well as the asset's format can push assets below it down, and the rows are not even. The staggered view is hard on the eyes, when trying to pick the right asset. When we scroll down to view more images, the pages redraws and assets keep moving around. This has been very frustrating to our users and this is the most common enhancement request from our users. Our request is to make the Card view grid-like, where all rectangles in a row are aligned. Use-case:Search results and browsing assetsCurrent/Experienced Behavior:Currently, Card view in AEM Assets is staggered.Improved/Expected Behavior:Card view is grid-like, where all rectangles in a row are aligned.Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable):AEM Assets 6.5.6Customer-name/Organization name:Wakefern Food CorpScreenshot (if applicable):............................Code package (if applicable): ............................
Description - Our Creative teams have Projects that require multiple versions of a creative to be rendered with slight differences in size, composition, and messaging within the artwork itself. The general theme still rolls up to the project itself, but the variances require individual Approvals by the legal team to ensure the offerings, messaging, and overall creative association is allowed from a legal standpoint. The issue we are running into is trying to create a joint proof for all of these similar (But slightly different) creatives, is that we can only approve or reject all at once. If only one or two of the creatives get rejected, we have to start the whole proof of all creative assets over again with a version 2.Why is this feature important to you - It will save time and effort on our creative team that is currently spread thin from a resource allocation standpoint.How would you like the feature to work - I would like to be able to submit individual approvals on the combined proof. The combined proof creates a zip file that acts as the actual reviewed file. With Individual Approvals enabled, an approval on each separate file would create a nonzipped version of the file to be saved in the documents folder (OR a specified "Approved" Folder if possible). Anything not approved would have to be changed and iterated in the Proof Version 2. EX: a combined Proof of 5 files has three approved and 2 Rejected. The 3 approved files are saved as individual files in an "Approved Folder" in the documents section. The two rejected will be required to be uploaded as a version 2 combined proof. Current Behavior - The combined proof is created as a zip file for the actual review file, but you must approve or reject all files at the same time. No individual approval is possible.
Product - Customer Journey Analytics (CJA) Description - Date and Time Filter in Segmentation (Reporting Segmentation)Why is this feature important to you - To segment data from date & time dimensionHow would you like the feature to work - seamlessly Current Behaviour - Currently we are unable to filter a date range in with a segment given a date/time is in dimension ex - transaction date. To make matters more complicated this transaction date is present in profile dataset. For such cases it would nice to have segmentation for date range like we have in the data view to filter such as "before" or after a particular date. I have attached screen shots currently in data view and segments as a reference RegardsShrikar
There is an abundance of issue/task/project data available in the 'Updates Collections'. Currently, the data in these collections can only be displayed, as is. The Updates Collection data can not be manipulated with expressions (eg: specifying an expression to retrieve only a specific update type), as with other Collections. This was confirmed with Technical Support. It would be very helpful to be able to use expressions with the Updates collection, to aid in reporting. Thanks
Currently, using calculated fields, you can calculate the total duration of an object - project, task, issue - approval. However, if the approval has multiple stages, it is not possible to see the duration of each stage, to determine bottlenecks or roadblocks. You can only calculate total duration.
When one opens a New Request, the Recent Paths loads at the top. I would like to be able to turn that feature off as it seems to be confusing some of our users from time to time. Especially if they are not regular users. They tend to not look further down the drop down list.
At present, Administrators cannot control the ability for a user to see some of the Financial Data object fields. We want the ability, as Administrators, to hide cost-related fields from a users, while still surfacing revenue-related fields. For example, we won't want project managers being able to see Planned and Actual Cost field data at the task and project levels for other users. They could easily find out how much they are getting paid. That is sensitive information. However, we do want project managers to be able to see Planned and Actual Revenue data at the task and project levels so they can account for this while managing project health and trying to stay aligned with what was sold. It's an all or nothing solution right now, in that you have to remove visibility of the Financial Data object in Access Levels if you don't want cost-related field data to be visible. The problem with this is that it also removes visibility to all other field data located in the Financial Data object (e.g. Planned and Actual Revenue).
Description - To be able to have an upload field related to a topic in a custom form, it would be helpful to have an upload field as a custom field type. Why is this feature important to you - We have several briefing forms, which require to be able to upload documents related to different fields included in the form. How would you like the feature to work - Being able to add an upload field at any position in a custom field. Perfect would be, to be able to define a target folder individually for each upload field. Current Behaviour - We only have a single upload field at above or after a custom form. If the requestor has to upload different documents, he/she has to remember, all those to do it after / before filling the form completely.
Description - I would love to have access to a new field type to select a period of time (from - to)Why is this feature important to you - To be able define a periodHow would you like the feature to work - classical "Date Range Picker": 1st click: calendar popup, 2nd click: set start date, 3rd click: set end date, 4th click: applyCurrent Behaviour - Currently two date fields have to be added where we do not have any kind of verification if the date selected in the second field is after the first one. RegardsLars
test ideaaa
For greater modularity/reusability, please allow a special "this program" picklist option in the "Change Program Member Data" flow step so it can be used in central/global executable campaigns
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: For investigations within repository browser it would be nice if you could select property values with your mouse in order to copy it to clipboard and use it further. Use-case: If I lock for a page and want to check which cq:template is assigned, I would like to copy the value of cq:template property and past this path into oath browser of the Repository Browser in order to check this node. Example attached. Current/Experienced Behavior: No marking and therefore copying of the values possible. Improved/Expected Behavior: Have standard behavior available to simply mark text with your mouse and copy it. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS: Repository Browser Customer-name/Organization name: Carl Zeiss AG Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
I would like to see a feature added to build and execute Test Cases. Something like Test Rail. This way the users could track pass/fail on each test case within workfront and fails could trigger an issue on the testing task. There doesn't seem to be much on the market today aside from Test Rail. JIRA and VSTS have automated testing built in to them, but there is almost always user testing required. If Workfront could add this feature, it would set them apart from the competition.
create a value when using the 'in time frame' operator to be next month. That way we can have recurring campaigns that will look at date fields and trigger off of upcoming events. especially helpful for fields that do not have a negative compliment. For example: start date in time frame next month.
We would like to have the ability to filter out comments on the Mentions widget where the user is not directly mentioned . This is important for those who assign tasks (for example), because currently they see comments for all tasks they assigned but can't quickly see comments waiting on their response or attention. Currently, there is no filter option available for this widget.
Description - I want to be able to assign a team/group to a task so that it is added to resources schedules.Why is this feature important to you - It stops the need of manually adding lots of people which can be time consuming and prone to error if you have 40/50+ people to add. Very useful for company meetings/socials that need to be added into resource schedules. Any new people added to the group/team would also be automatically included in the task, so it would be future proofed if made as a reoccurring task. How would you like the feature to work - simply select the team/group in the assignment box for the task.Current Behaviour - Adding a tea,/group doesn't add the time to resource schedules.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Improve the visibility logic of Manage Publication button Use-case: For a node, make the button of Manage Publication visible when the conditions are meeting crx:replicate + workflow users. Current/Experienced Behavior: 1. workflow-users are seeing Manage Publication functionality even if users don't have crx:replicate privilege.2. crx:replicate privilege is making both of Quick Publish and Manage Publication visible for a node. However, Quick Publish is working well, and Manage Publication requires additional permissions from workflow-users. Adding users into workflow-users group will cause another problem where users will see Manage Publication feature for the nodes which don't have crx:replicate privilege. It doesn't make sense because the publish access from workflow-users is extended to the nodes even only having jcr:read privilege. Improved/Expected Behavior: The visibility logic of Manage Publication button should be improved. The expected behavior is to make this button visible when meeting both of conditions: 1. the node is having crx:replicate privilege2. the user is in workflow-users groupNOTE: If Manage Publication can work like Quick Publish (the same visibility logic; no need to add users into workflow-users), it is great. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a Cloud ServiceAEM Release: 2023.10.14029.20231020T111912Z Customer-name/Organization name: Kyndryl Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Demande de résumé des améliorations des fonctionnalités (RFE) : Display metadata specific of 3D assets Cas d’utilisation : as we have for all images or videos we need also to know what is the identity of our 3D assets, and it will be easier to select the good asset between different "resolution" of assets Comportement actuel/expérimenté : no info today just preview Comportement amélioré/attendu : Display metadata specific of 3D assets (GLB, GLTF, FBX, 3DMAX, USDZ) : size, vertex number, number of textures, cherry on the cake : resolution of texture, to display for in the properties of the assets Informations sur l’environnement (version d’AEM / service pack, et autres informations spécifiques si applicables) : AEMaaCS Nom du client/de l’organisation : LOUIS VUITTON / Nathalie RIASSE Copie d’écran (si applicable) : Package de code (si applicable) :
Already have an account? Login
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
