Build better products with our product team
Description - In Alerts, weekday filter alerts email should be sent on weekdays and weekends filter alerts email should be sent on weekends Why is this feature important to you - Monitoring the daily data on weekdays and weekends How would you like the feature to work - In weekday filter is applied in an alert, if the alert is triggered on weekend the alert email should not be sent for the weekend. Same thing for the weekends filter, if the alert triggered on the weekday then the email should not be sent for the weekday. In brief, weekday filtered alerts should be sent on weekday only and weekend filtered alerts should be sent on weekends only. Current Behaviour - for the weekday filters, if the alert is triggered on weekend, then the email is sent with the data as ZERO.
Description - A quick filter for a dashboard page to find reportsWhy is this feature important to you - We sometime house more than 10 reports and having to scroll through to find one particular one when you just need to see the report(s) that are needed at the timeHow would you like the feature to work - Like it works in projects and reports with either the magnifying glass or a prompt optionCurrent Behavior - scroll through dashboard, no filters or prompts
When a project business case is submitted for approval, Workfront should create an item in the approver's work request or approval queue. It would also be nice to have an email notification, as our Portfolio owners infrequently log in to Workfront.
Delegate document approvals the same way we can delegate issue and task approvals. Workers and Reviewers should be able to delegate their document approvals if they know in advance they will be OOO, traveling, etc. We use the document approval process to route proofs for approval, but I think this functionality would be beneficial for proof approvals as well, since we eventually hope to use Workfront proof once we are satisfied with the progress of the integration.
Description - When in your timesheet, it would be nice to have the option to expand the view to show ALL the tasks in a project, not just the ones Workfront considers important. Why is this feature important to you - Sometimes things happen before or after they're scheduled, so they don't show in that week's timesheet. It's frustrating to have to always open the project in a separate window in order to track time. How would you like the feature to work - I'd like there to be a + sign beside the > (opens the project somewhere else) where it would rollout all the additional tasks from the project that don't show initially. It would turn into a - sign so I could roll them back up once I'm done tracking.Current Behaviour - They simply don't show and you have to open the project, find the task, open it, track your time, then return to the timesheet for the rest.
Implementation / api guide for tracking custom events on the Dynamic Chat.
Description -Why is this feature important to you - The biggest challenge for the customers who are using Adobe experience platform is to manage the active profiles only in the profile store, to delete the profiles we use profile delete entity API, which is cumbersome process, the below idea will be useful to delete the profiles. How would you like the feature to work - This feature work based on the create the new dataset with active customers and delete the older dataset. this is the simple and easy way to delete the profiles.Current Behavior -Create the profile enabled dataset with same schema use for the current datasetSelect active profiles from the old schema into the new schemaDelete the old schema , will completely remove all the foot prints of the inactive profiles from profile store and all the places in AEPProfile store will rebuilt only with the active customers
With the new change to Resource Pools are persistent in the Resource Budgeting area of the Business Case after 2019.3 is not a great user experience. You now can not add or remove Resource Pools from with in the Business Case. You need to come out of the Business Case and go into the Project Details to add or remove Resource Pools. It would be better to reverse this change and have the ability to manage the Resource Pools within the business case.
If documents are linked to/from WF to SharePoint, we'd like to be able to get a quick view of the file path/folder they were linked to.
If we have a repeated activity that has multiple steps, it would be great to have that be able to be set up as recurring. For example if every week the following needs to happen:Week 1 Submission:Write UpReview/ApproveSubmit
Description -Why is this feature important to you - We do not have Fusion and we need an easy way of keeping our projects in synch with templatesHow would you like the feature to work - when we update a template, a dialog box displays asking whether we want all associated open projects updated with the changes (modified task text, new tasks, etc.); if "Yes" selected, changes are applied to projects added previously from that template that are not in Closed or Resolved statuses. Task statuses on the affected projects would not be changed. For users not wishing to change in-flight projects, they can select "No." For tasks already Closed, consider skipping changes. Current Behaviour - Template changes are not reflected in projects. Admins must run reports to identify them and then make manual changes. Most likely, they don't do that work, due to time pressure. When an old project gets copied, therefore, it will have the wrong tasks on it, perpetuating the issue. If the changes were propagated out, more projects would have the current tasks and copying would be more likely to pick up the current tasks. Thank you.
Description - It's great that Microsoft documents like Word, PPT, etc. are supported by Workfront's Proofing tool. We have used this tool with MS products for roughly 10 years. However, Google Documents like Docs and Slides are not supported with the proofing tool. This means when someone includes a Google Doc in their Workfront request/issue, it cannot be converted to a proof by Workfront. This allows for the document to continually be revised without knowledge from those using Workfront or going back to review a document later. Why is this feature important - In order for us to continue using Workfront as a marketing request queue and compliance approval workflow, it's extremely important that the Google Document being added to Workfront does not change while the various teams are reviewing and providing their approvals. Often, our reviewing teams will reject and/or provide edits to a client using the proofing tool, which allows Marketing the opportunity to completely overhaul the document or simply make small edits. It depends on the feedback given from the reviewing team.Once approved, we need the proofing tool to freeze that document in time so that regardless of what the document owner is doing in Google Docs, it is clearly documented what was approved by compliance. This matters when government regulators come in to audit various marketing campaigns and assets. Up until this point, we have used Microsoft products which are all supported by the proofing tool. Google is not, and our entire organization has transitioned to using the Google suite of products.Current Behaviour and workaround - This means we have to institute a cumbersome work around until this is working for Google Docs. Our teams will have to download their Google document as a PDF, then upload it to Workfront so that the proofing tool can function as intended. This is not sustainable over time.We need Workfront's proofing tool to support Google documents.
The template ID field basically lists the FIRST template applied to the project. I'm not sure there is a way to see ALL the templates applied to a project. Why is this feature important to you - We need a way to track if an old template has been used and replaced with a current template. This will quickly allow a user to identify why their requests are not being routed properly, How would you like the feature to work - A drop down menu of the templates that have been attached or a report for templates attached per project. Current Behavior - The Template ID field only displays the first template attached. If someone goes in and attaches a new template, it does not display the current new template.
Our entire organization has transitioned to Google, and will soon cease using MS products. Workfront allows Google assets (docs, slides, sheets, etc) to be uploaded, but doesn't support Proofing those assets. We have to download the Google asset into an MS asset, save, then upload in order to generate a proof. These extra steps are cumbersome. Our Compliance team expects the Workfront Proof to be the final record of truth when they approve a request.
We would like to define business logic criteria to validate the input on fields, so that we can control the data that is being entered into fields.
We recently encountered an issue with one of our project team using Workfront.The team is using “Custom Form” for one the projects. They have lot of editable fields and they wanted to have validation in those fields. 1. The user should not be able to enter more than n number of characters. If they did, immediately the field should show error or restrict the user to enter more characters.2. Date field validation. Example, the user should not be allowed enter a date less than today or something like that. Both of these should happen before submission of a custom form i.e. on real time basis when user is entering values in the custom form.Looks like Workfront doesn’t support those kind of validation.
I would like to be able to make edit to the Global Validation rule to add (or remove) domains - OR - I would like to be able to create a custom rule that is much larger than the 2,000 character limit (at least the same size or larger than the current Global Validation list).
We have a required field call "Is this request Mandated" and it is a required field with a "Yes/No" option. Below that we have another field call "Mandated Date Required Field". This field is not required as if they select "No" we don't want them to be required to put in a date.What we are looking for is if "Is this request Mandated", (which is required) is selected to Yes, then the next field "Mandated Date Required Field" is then a required field.
It would be nice to have the ability to download all segment definitions into csv file, just like dowloading of report suite information into csv file. I want to be able to document them offline.
Zusammenfassung der Funktionsverbesserungsanfrage (RFE): Show warning that other editor is editing the same page Anwendungsfall: Show warning that other editor is editing the same page Aktuelles/erlebtes Verhalten: At the moment, AEM allows two or more editors to edit the same page. Due to auto-saving one editor overrides the changes of the other. There is a Lock feature, but users forget about that most of the time. Verbessertes/erwartetes Verhalten: If an editor edits a page and a second editor starts editing the same page, both must see a warning with the name and email address of the other editor that is working on that same page. Umgebungsdetails (AEM-Version/Service Pack, ggf. weitere Angaben): AEM as a Cloud Service Name des Kunden/der Organisation: VERLAG DES OSTERREICHISCHEN GEWERKSCHAFTSBUNDES GMBH Screenshot (sofern zutreffend): Code-Paket (sofern zutreffend):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: AEM can determine (either exactly or by degree of likelihood) which HTML elements are above the fold and which elements are below or outside of the initial viewport. And AEM allows to automatically put a loading="eager" or loading="lazy" attribute, respectively, on those elements. Use-case: The performance of web page and the user's experience can improve (sometimes drastically) if img and iframe elements are lazyloaded. To do this correctly, elements below the fold or out of the viewport (such as inside a carousel) should get a loading="lazy" attribute. Others should get a loading="eager" attribute (the default).This is a process that should take place after when a page is composed and sent to the dispatcher. AEM would also be the first CMS (as far as I know) to have such a built-in feature. Current/Experienced Behavior: No such feature exists. Improved/Expected Behavior: Adding of such a feature. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): 6.5 Customer-name/Organization name: Loterie Nationale Loterij Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Enable the ability to directly select an asset when using the path field in the Asset viewer of the authoring page. Use-case: N/A Current/Experienced Behavior: Right now, if you enter a direct path to an asset in the "path" of the assert viewer of the authoring site in AEM, the asset is not being selected. Instead, nothing is being returned. You will need to remove the file name part of the path in order to be able to get into the folder where the asset is and then be able to select the asset Improoved/Expected Behavior: Users can directly go to an asset if a direct path to the assets is provided Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaCs Customer-name/Organization name: Proquire Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable): N/A
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Show info about child pages to be unpublished while unpublishing of parent page from editor mode Use-case: There are parent page that has got several child pages. All published Current/Experienced Behavior: 1. While parent page is being unpublished using Manage Publication button from structure, the message about number of references and child pages appears 2. If parent page is being unpublished via Edit mode - Unpublish page button from drop down menu, notification without info of child pages appears Improved/Expected Behavior: Need to add to second case notification information about child pages that are supposed to be unpublished too Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Tested on clean AEM 6.5.14 (without our application) Oracle JDK 11.0.17 Customer-name/Organization name: Veeam Software Screenshot (if applicable): 1. Unpublising using Manage publication button from structure There s message about child pages to be unpublished as well 2. Unpublishing page via edit mode with Unpublish item in drop down menu There is no message about child pages Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Support Vue.js and SvelteKit next to React.js and Angular for AEM. Use-case: A client wants to use Vue.js or Angular for its (SPA) frontend. Vue.js is a popular framework, second only to React.js. Svelte is more popular than React.js in the Asian market (China). Current/Experienced Behavior: Only React.js and Angular are officially supported. Improved/Expected Behavior: Also Vue.js and SvelteKit are officially supported for the ui.frontend module. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM AMS 6.5.16 Customer-name/Organization name: / Screenshot (if applicable): / Code package (if applicable): /
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The AEM Authoring interface doesn't work with the debugClientLibs query param so debugging client libraries is not possible anymore. Use-case: There is a documented parameter debugClientLibs that produces client libraries output in the debug mode, without combining and minifying the JS and CSS files. It was very useful in the early versions of AEM but stopped working some time ago, either due to new out-of-the-box client libraries or because of those libraries' modifications, or because of the evolution of modern web browsers. It would be good to have it back. Current/Experienced Behavior: The authoring interface doesn't work correctly when there is documented debugClientLibs=true parameter present in the query. Improved/Expected Behavior: The authoring interface should work when the debugClientLibs=true parameter is set in the query Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Stopped working since AEM 6.3 (roughly). Tested on Chrome only. Customer-name/Organization name: Media.Monks Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
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.
