Build better products with our product team
Demande de résumé des améliorations des fonctionnalités (RFE) : There was a functionality on AEM 6.3 that allowed users to copy an asset or a page, then refresh the page (go to another folder by modifying the URL on the browser) and then paste the asset or page to the destination folder. This functionality has been removed on AEM 6.4 to avoid a copy/paste from a module to another one (Assets to Sites for example). But it should still be available when you stay on the same module : copy/paste an asset in the module Assets. Cas d’utilisation : Users used this functionality on 6.3 to avoid going through the whole folder hierarchy when they already know the destination path. It's time saving. Comportement actuel/expérimenté : Select an asset or a page Click on “Copy” In the same window, manually modify the browser URL to go to another folder to paste it Example : From : https://{localhost}/assets.html/content/dam/fr/2022/products/hr To : https://{localhost}/assets.html/content/dam/us/2022/products/hr The window will be refreshed and you’ll be located on the destination folder The button “Paste” is NOT present Comportement amélioré/attendu : Select an asset or a page Click on “Copy” In the same window, manually modify the browser URL to go to another folder to paste it Example : From : https://{localhost}/assets.html/content/dam/fr/2022/products/hr To : https://{localhost}/assets.html/content/dam/us/2022/products/hr The window will be refreshed and you’ll be located on the destination folder The button “Paste” is present Click on “Paste The asset has been pasted Informations sur l’environnement (version d’AEM / service pack, et autres informations spécifiques si applicables) : AEM 6.5.12 Nom du client/de l’organisation : Sephora Copie d’écran (si applicable) : Package de code (si applicable) :
Description - A slider/setting in Recommendations criteria to tune how much the algorithm should explore items in the catalog.Why is this feature important to you - Our use case is to show some random/less relevant items in a set of User-based recommendations so the they're not overoptimised to what the user has previously browsed e.g. if user only or mostly views pages tagged "Educate me", they can be recommended a few pages tagged "Divert me" or "Inspire me" too (different values of the same attribute/field).It would also help adoption of Target within the business. Assuring Editorial and Product stakeholders that recommendations are not solely decided by an algorithm so less relevant but still important pages can be recommended would help alleviate concern that recommendations are overoptimised (we are a content/media website).How would you like the feature to work - In the Criteria screen, a slider similar to Attribute Weighting between 0% and 100% or 0 and 1 like AWS Personalize's:Current Behaviour - Adobe Target doesn't have this feature but here is briefly how it work on AWS Personalize:AWS Personalize has a hyperparameter called explorationWeight you can configure to set how much the algorithm should explore the recs catalog. Effectively it adds some randomness into the recommendations so new or less relevant items are recommended, e.g. an explorationWeight of 0.3 would include 3 lesser viewed or less relevant items in a set of 10 recommendations. Adobe Target promotions and Attribute weighting are not really the same.AWS Personalize doco:https://docs.aws.amazon.com/personalize/latest/dg/native-recipe-new-item-USER_PERSONALIZATION.htmlhttps://aws.amazon.com/blogs/machine-learning/amazon-personalize-can-now-create-up-to-50-better-recommendations-for-fast-changing-catalogs-of-new-products-and-fresh-content/
Description - Allow for calendar views to house the feature to easily adjust dates by dragging and dropping Why is this important to you- Allow for calendar views to house the feature to easily adjust dates - Our marketing teams use the calendar detailed view (report) + calendar view for channel planning. In the previous system they could easily look at only the calendar view and drag & drop the marketing tactics to easily adjust dates as needed and it would auto-adjust the dates in the detailed report/ view. This adds time to the process with WF vs the new system that enabled it. How would you like the feature to work - Enable the option to drag & drop to adjust dates on the calendar viewCurrent Behaviour - You cannot drag & drop/ adjust dates on a calendar view
Description - Across Workfront are typeahead fields that have limits on how many options they list. I confirmed with support that this is by design and occurs in various places across Workfront. For example, in the Project Overview, the Portfolio and Program fields show only the top 14 (approximately) options. In the case of portfolios and programs, I suspect many Workfront instances have more than 14 active portfolios or programs (or other objects that have a max list). There is no indication that other options exist and that a user can/must type to search for those options.Why is this feature important to you - Users are not always informed of the full breadth of options. If the option is not presented, they sometimes assume it doesn't exist and therefore choose something that isn't appropriate. In the case of Portfolios and Programs, I have project managers who aren't familiar with all the Portfolios we have, so they have to look elsewhere. Some project managers, though, might assume that the best option exists and therefore choose the next best fit. This "next best fit" can throw off our reporting and result in unnecessary housekeeping to bring our data back into alignment. I can't expect my project managers to memorize all our portfolios and campaigns, especially since the options change as our business priorities evolve. To help my projects managers work efficiently, I'd like to empower them with the information at the typeahead field instead of asking them to pause their flow to find the information they need to enter the data.How would you like the feature to work - Either increase the maximum that typeahead fields can present OR visually indicate that there are more options. For example, a "See all" button would open the area that lists all the items available to the user, which then informs them of what to search for in the field.Current Behaviour - Users may choose the wrong option, therefore placing an unnecessary burden on system administration to clean up the mistake. At best, users have to stop what they're doing to look up the options in another area of Workfront—if they have access.
We are heavy users of the Time-off Calendar in our Workfront instance but the time-off calendar has limitations and only shows the blocks of time but no option for additional text or notes. It would be beneficial to see some detail in the time-off calendar as our teammates spend time away but that time is not necessarily related to personal time-off nor is it related to a project task. The current design does not permit any additional information and a reportable notes field would be so very helpful.
Description - Add "otherTeamIDs" as Filter optionWhy is this feature important to you - Some of our reports need to be filtered to only show data from members who belong to a certain Team, which is not their home team. How would you like the feature to work - Similarly to the "otherGroupIDs" works; the only difference it would be for the Other Teams associated with a User's settings, rather than the Other Groups.Current Behaviour - Only "Home Team ID" is available as a filter in reporting, several attempts have been made via text mode but there's not an optimal solution. This new filter option would help solve for use cases like the one described below that I (currently) and AlDe (from 2018) are facing:"When attempting to create an hours report, there is no filter option to include only those who are assigned to a team, which may not be the home team. As a result, each individual name must be entered on the report as filter. In the future, if there are changes to employees roles, the filter on the report would need to be maintained. If an option for "Other Team" is available, the report would continue to pull appropriate results as individual account settings are updated." - AlDe, 2018 (Recreating this idea to keep it fresh and will request to merge the idea ordinally posted in 2017.)
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Strong and Em tags in multiline text in Content Fragments Use-case: editing multiline text in RTE components while meeting requirements for WCAG 2.0 Current/Experienced Behavior: b/i/u buttons create <b>,<i>,<u> tags which have no semantic meaning Improved/Expected Behavior: in order to convey meaning to users using assistive technology, we should be able to add <strong> and <em> instead of <b> and <i>. <u> on the other hand has little semantic value and will likely confuse users who will think it is a link. it should probably be removed or replaced with something with similar semantic meaning like the <mark> element Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.4-6.5 Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Would like the following feature - Enable Priority Queue configuration in SCD agents for AEMaaCS. Use-case: We want to implement a priority queue for one of our tenant in a multi-tenant architecture for sites in AEMaaCS. While other sites may have multiple pages that are getting activated, one site needs to avoid delay in replication. Current/Experienced Behavior: No option to configure a priority queue in AEMaaCS. Improved/Expected Behavior: Option to configure a priority queue in AEMaaCS should be available. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaaCS - Version - 2023.1 Customer-name/Organization name: TA Digital Screenshot (if applicable): N.A Code package (if applicable): N.A @kautuk_sahni
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: The time is not displayed in the date (for example, PUBLISHD) of each node displayed on the Sites management screen. Therefore, the user cannot confirm when it was published. There is a way to customize the overlay, but I would like it to display the time as standard. Use-case: When creating a site, check when the node was published. The time is displayed on the Assets management screen, but it is not displayed on the Sites management screen. Current/Experienced Behavior: The format is "date". Improved/Expected Behavior: The format is "datetime". Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM Release 2023.4.12142.20230526T152858Z Customer-name/Organization name: SCSK Corp. Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: I propose adobe to include an option to expand the entire parent node along with its child nodes with a single click. Because, sometimes it feels annoying to click "+" on each node to see the final child node(leaf node) if it has a multiple child nodes. Although the idea sounds simple, but it would be useful sometimes when people in a hurry to check something. Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: For example - cq: dialog, we have to expand it node by node until we reach the child node. Improved/Expected Behavior: My idea - When I right click on a node - a new option called "Expand Entire Node" should be implemented such that once I click on it, it would show/expand it till the last child node. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): I think this feature is not present in any version of AEM it seems. Customer-name/Organization name: Adobe Experience Manager Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable): Guys - What's your view on this idea???
Description - Assignees can delegate tasks to someone else in Workfront. Delegated tasks are visible to the original assignee and the delegated assignee via their Work Lists. However, the Project Owner does not have any visibility into delegated tasks from a project timeline or report view. Why is this feature important to you - Project Owners do not know when tasks are delegated so they may reassign or add a task to someone else. This can cause duplicate tasks assigned to the same delegated assignee (or two different assignees) and ultimately confusion and delays. How would you like the feature to work - I would like there to be a field or flag to show Project Owners and anyone else viewing the project tasks when a task has been delegated and to whom. Current Behaviour - There is no easy way for project participants to easily see when a project task is delegated. The only way to see if a project task is delegated and to whom takes multiple clicks.1. From the Project Task list, click into the Task.2. From the Task, click Assignments and Delegations.3. From Assignments and Delegations, click the Delegation tab. Even then, there is no flag on the project or task to even make you think to check Delegations.
Currently, the Marketo/GoToWebinar integration only supports one-off live webinars: no simulive, on-demand, or recurring webinars. Can you please add support for recorded webinars with the Marketo/GoToWebinar integration? This single feature would take our webinar program to new heights. The ability to have recorded webinars collect registration information directly in Marketo at scale would be a game-changer. Please let me know, Scott
Currently, when you hover over a user's name, or start to @ mention them in an update, the preview text will show their user name plus their primary job role. This causes confusion for most of our user base, who are expecting to see the user's job title instead of the job role. We get questions about this all the time. Not everyone updates their profile with a job title, so I think this feature could work by showing the user's job title if it exists, but then it can show the primary job role if the job title does not exist.
Description - An exception is thrown and processing halts when using the WebSDK extension and there are two instances of the adobe_mc in the query string. Note: this was reported in Support Case E-001008770, and even though it does not seem to be a Analytics-related problem I was asked to also enter it here. For good measure, it was also reported in the Alloy extension github as issue #346. Hopefully one of these will get it fixed. Why is this feature important to you - While there should not be two instances of the adobe_mc parameter in the query string when attempting to pass identity between domains, the WebSDK extension should deal with the situation better than throwing and exception and halting processing. When this happens, no tracking occurs, no test propositions are returned, etc. How would you like the feature to work - When there are two instances of the same parameter, the results of a parse operation are returned as an array, not a string. The extension code that is looking for the identity parameter needs to be aware of this, check the type and proceed accordingly instead of assuming it will be a string and throwing an exception when attempting a split operation. Current Behaviour - The following error popped up in the console:Uncaught (in promise) TypeError: [alloy] [Identity] An error occurred while executing the getIdentity command.Caused by: [Identity] An error occurred while executing the onBeforeRequest lifecycle hook.Caused by: o.split is not a functionThis kept the page from working. Investigation showed the root of the problem was the adobe_mc parameter had been appended to the URL twice (by accident). The code that parses the parameter value does not do a type check after getting the parameter, and when there are more than one instance of a parameter it is represented by an array instead of a string. The code attempts to do a split() operation, but since the type is Array the exception is thrown. To recreate, simply duplicate the adobe_mc parameter on any link and load it.The extension needs to be updated to check the type and take appropriate action if it is an Array and not a String.
Description - It would be great to have validations on custom forms. Like set up basic rules like triggering client side error while filling up info in the form for the text fields. For example to capture email ID to have @ and . in the text else generate the eror for correcting the format of the input field. Why is this feature important to you - It would help greatly in cllecting correct data in the forms. Validations are basic requiremenst to have some valuable data being collected in the any form.How would you like the feature to work - Just like Display logic, have a sset rule on fields to allow us set up validation rules.Current Behaviour - There is no such way to apply any kind of validation.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Dashboard to display total number of pages , Assets , users , users group , tags and ability to export the data in CSV format for individual AEM instance. Use-case: As a AEM admin i want to know how many assets , pages etc available in each AEM instance ( dev , qa , stage , prod) provisioned in my cloud environment and will be able to extract the data in csv format . Current/Experienced Behavior: No dashboard exist , need to run report or custom queries to get the data Improved/Expected Behavior: Real time dashboard can help AEM admin to get this holistic view in one screen Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM as a cloud service Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Brand Portal users to be able to update metadata property of uploaded assets in contribution folder Use-case: If user on brand portal doesn't have access to AEM assets, he is not able to update the assets metadata for the assets that has been uploaded on Brand Portal Contribution folder and its not necessary that metadata should always be embedded and in some scenario there might be some purchased assets from other vendor and updating their metadata values on assets itself is not possible Current/Experienced Behavior: users on brand portal can't edit the metadata value as its read only Improved/Expected Behavior: Looking for improved feature to enable the edit of metadata only for New folder inside contribution folder on AEM brand Portal so that whenever user on brand portal upload the assets they can also modify/update the metadata value for the assets that they uploaded. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: "Most Recent Run Date" and "Most Recent Run Status" columns on the Adobe Cloud Manager Content Set screen. Use-case: As the customers, we create a lot of content copy sets inside the Content Sets screen of Adobe CM. As the list of content sets increases and used over time, it is not easy to track what is the most recent date a given content set was run and it's status unless we go into "Copy Content Activity" screen. Current/Experienced Behavior: No way to check when was a given content set ran and it's status unless it is checked in the "Copy Content Activity" screen. Improved/Expected Behavior: Adobe CM Content Copy screens users will be able to easily get the information on when a given content set was last ran and it's status during the most recent run. It would be even helpful, if these columns can be sorted ASC/DESC. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Adobe Cloud Manager portal. Customer-name/Organization name: Sudheer Sundalam / Silicon Labs Inc., Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
There is no way to control for or enforce a custom word or character count within the various custom form text fields. While there are native character limits in the various fields available (https://experienceleague.adobe.com/docs/workfront/using/basics/update-work-items-view-updates/character-limits-in-fields.html?lang=en), none are customizable and each field has its own unique strengths and weaknesses. This functionality would be particularly valuable for the text field with formatting as we are using these forms to author content and the text often needs to fit within a predetermined amount of space within a report's template or on a webpage. We are using a Fusion integration to move the text from these text fields to AEM Assets, and need a way to flag to the creatives who are authoring the text within Workfront how many words they can author to control for publication errors before they submit their content. We've explored a lot of different options and are surprised there is no way at all to enforce a limit or even highlight the word count to authors within the form. We've explored calculated fields as well and think the LEFT or LEN functions could be interesting, but they are incapable of referencing rich text fields. Is there any plan to include the optionality to enforce a word or character count within custom form text fields or show a word count to users using the field within the form?
Description -Add a way to group related reports and visualizations. It could be as simple as a container box, like in the attached image. Other options, change background colors, change border colors, etc. Why is this feature important to you -We have a few 'snapshot' dashboards that have many summaries, and it would be great to be able to group and differentiate them. This way, you can glance at it, see the overall picture, and not go cross-eyed. We've been adding in text visualizations to give some separation but sometimes it just makes the report long instead of easy to scan. BTW, we don't rely on these for takeaways and/or alerts, but they are handy for quick glances and answering frequently occurring questions. Some of other dashboard would benefit from this as well, but those are typically more specific. How would you like the feature to work -Add a method to group, define, or visually separate two or more reports and/or visualizations. Select the items to group, right click, and have the option to group in a box, change background color, change border color, or whatever method is implemented to do this. While multiple ways to differentiate would be okay, I think only one is needed. Current Behaviour -The only distinguishing feature currently is the description. Sample data: obviously just the same two summaries in each 'group' but it's easy to see in this display that there are four separate chunks of information.
We have some additional enhancement requests we would like to have submitted. These have been identified as enhancements that can be made at the platform level to reduce risk through the development and production process: Additional enhancements to be requested: a. "Request Confirmation" is automatically applied when a new Delivery object is created. Currently a manual process b. Idle automatic log-out • Currently, Adobe does not log you out after a period of no activity. Introducing an automatic log-out after a period of time can reduce risk. • Would recommend 10 minutes of no activity in a window be the default • When logging back in, it takes you to the home page, not the object you were in previously c. Log or view of who has what activities open in the platform.
Currently, when you set up an automated workflow on proofing, you have to assign a specific user to the workflow stage. We have over 500 possible reviewers and approvers, we do not want to tell the proof creator to select from 500 possible workflows. We want the workflow to instead base it on an object on the project, eg the sponsor, or a job role related to the project eg a creative director. So for example, stage 1, assign a $$project.sponsor (just thinking how $$USER.ID is used on reports) so it's like a wildcard and when the user selects this automated workflow, it picks on the name that's the project sponsor on the project.
Hi! I was very excited to create an automated workflow for my team, but we have hundreds of users that may be reviewing proofs depending on the projects, so it is not possible to choose one name in the template. Can it be set up so that instead of having to choose an individual, you can choose a role? For example, I want to have the Account Manager and Project Manager who are assigned to that project be the reviewers of the proof in the automated workflow - but because that changes for each project, I would need the template to assign based on role, rather than a specific person. There is another idea similar to this post, but it's from 4 years ago, so trying to reignite this effort.
Description - Add a breadcrumb of the object to the mentions widget on the new home. Functionality would be similar to mentions in the My Updates section. Why is this feature important to you - Allows users to click into the object related to the mention for more info/context without having to navigate away from the home page. How would you like the feature to work - Add a linked breadcrumb above the update to the object Current Behaviour - No breadcrumb or link to the object from the mentions widget on new home
Currently, secondary dimension breakdown for each primary dimension row is set to 5 by default, if you need to see top 10 for each secondary dimension row, you have to manually set it in each secondary dimension row. It would be great to have a setting to change default breakdown row numbers to any up to 1, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400.
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.
