Build better products with our product team
Description - Currently the maximum look back window you can set for user based criteria is 60 days (2 months). Ideally we would want the ability to always remember user behavior. A secondary opportunity we would be open to is remembering user data for 365 days. Why is this feature important to you - We have usecases where it would be beneficial to be able to select greater than 60 days. For example, we have email campaigns that Target customers that have not been to our site in over 60 days. We think being able to surface recommendations relevant to those specific customers would enable us to more effectively drive them back to our site to shop again. Currently we are limited so those customers get generic popularity based recommendations served to them. Being able to show personalized, user based content in our emails is important to us. How would you like the feature to work - We would like to be able to rely on customer behavioral data for greater than 60 days. We think a minimum 365 days would be desirable. Current Behaviour - Currenlty, we can choose to lookback at behavioral data for 60 days which is even less than the settings we have for our visitor profile lifetime (90 days). This limits us in being able to personalize at the individual level considering our average customer visits our site once every 6 months.
I got a renewal notice the other day for a daily delivered workspace saying the schedule was set to expire in 30 days. When I went to extend it for another 12 months I found that the max possible end date was only 30 days away. Adobe Support confirmed this is a new setting for the feature, which means i will now have to frequently update the end dates for dozens of daily dashboards sent throughout my company. What's more, why send me a 30 day notice when I can only extend it one additional day. Since Adobe seems resigned to this new functionality, I suggest the following minimal changes: 1. Allow daily reports to be scheduled 90 days into the future (not 30) 2. Send the renewal notice at end date minus 7 days (this still may get missed if I'm on vacation but better than it is now)
Most of our projects consist of multiple InDesign docs. (project working on right now consists of 14 separate files) Current process is to export each file separately to pdf to be able to post in workfront for proof routing. Then posting the multiple pdfs to a single job in workfront. Was hoping the plugin for IND would allow us to have one file open, then using the add files feature could post the files all at once to workfront. However the plugin only converts the open file to pdf to post, the remaining IND files do not get converted to pdf and the upload to proof fails. This feature would cut back on the time it takes to create and post proofs in workfront. Would be nice if any IND files added to the plug in tab would convert. on the fly and all would post to workfront. Current behavior noted above, opening and exporting each IND file individually to pdf then dragging and dropping into workfront to post proofs for review.
Currently the only way to send analytics datafeeds to a Aure Blob storage is by sharing storage keys & account details. We see this as a security risks to our azure accounts. A way around this is to use SAS tokens to give access the Azure BLOB container storage via CLI(Command Line Interafaces). Could this option be added to Analytics Data feeds.
Why is this feature important to you - We would like to bulk push large amounts of hi-res images from Workfront to AEM. How would you like the feature to work - It works but we get an error "Cannot send more than 1,024 Megabytes to Experience Manager" Current Behaviour - Very clunky and restrictive because of size limitations in transfer.
When you subscribe to a smart list, it sends you an email with a big DOWNLOAD REPORT button, the name of the smart list linked to same, and the criteria used to create the smart list. What's missing from this email is the one piece of information I actually want, which is how many people are in the list. I use these subscriptions for monthly reporting on the size of the various audiences. Adding a single line to the email - Smart List Person Count - would save the trouble of going into Marketo to view the smart list or downloading the report.
Description - We would like a native Workfront language switcher. There is already an email language switcher in User Settings, but currently Workfront as a whole uses the browser settings. Why is this feature important to you - We have worldwide teams that would like their browser to be set in their local language, but to view Workfront in English for better collaboration. How would you like the feature to work - Same as it works here on Experience League, have a "Change Language" button/drop down at the bottom of every page that allows you to switch the language of the page regardless of browser settings. Current Behaviour - Currently Workfront uses the browser language settings and does not have separate language preferences besides the language that emails are sent with.
Description Allow proof workflow templates to be added to project templates using an FPO Proof so that the proof workflow automatically gets pulled over when you convert your request into a project. When the designer or copywriter is ready to send through the proof for review, all they need to do is to upload a new proof version and select generate proof. Why is this feature important to you Currently, the project manager has to add all the proof workflows to all the projects. This would be a huge time saver to associate the project template and proof workflow immediately once converted. How would you like the feature to work Currently, you can add proof workflows to project templates but when you convert them, the workflow is not pulled over. If they were allowed to be pulled over, you can set the FPO proof to activate proof "manually" which could be one additional step the designer could change to "on proof creation" when the proof was ready to generate.
Description - WF defines the issue status Resolved as: a resolution was found and carried out for the issue. WF defines the issue status Closed as: no resolution could be found, but the issue is no longer a work item and, therefore, will be closed. Some issues can be resolved immediately, some are a gradual completion, some can't be resolved. If it's immediate, it makes sense/it's quicker to use the "mark as done" button. If it takes time, one can use the "% complete" bar, thus indicating to colleagues how far along it is and that it's being worked on; once complete, one sets it to 100%. In those cases, one would think the issue is considered a Resolved issue. Current Behaviour - However, "mark as done" results in a Resolved status, and 100% complete results in a Closed status. How does "100% complete" mean not resolved? Which is essentially what WF is saying. How would you like the feature to work - "Mark as done" and "100% complete" should both result in a Resolved status. If the issue can't be resolved, then the user can set the status to Closed or Won't Resolve.
All 6 people in our marketing team produce different emails each week which have to be approved by various managers and also sent to personnel on different sites for information and sample sending just isn't practical. It would REALLY useful and far more work-flow efficient if we were able to use the preview or 'view in browser' URL to send as a link to anyone that needs to view it.
Description - Why is this feature important to you - Implementation issues can sometimes lead to event metric set wrongly. In order to improve data quality, we need a solution to repair/delete custom events for data collected historically. How would you like the feature to work - We would like Data repair API to repair custom events. Current Behaviour - Data Repair API only supports repairing dimensions (eVars, props, activity map variables, etc)
Description - workPerDate field is currently under list of "Unsupported" API versions, this field is part of ASSIGN/TASK/OPTASK object types. It stores the "Planned Hours" per day per task/project. It allows us to do weekly allocation, availability reporting, as you can track users scheduled hours vs allocated hours to several projects and remaining availability on Weekly/Monthly basis. Why is this feature important to you - Allows team to view Planned Hours per day per task/project and build User level allocation/availability report. We could also use the "Resource Management" - Planner feature for this but unfortunately the Planner module is non-customizable, i.e. you can not add custom fields from User/Task/Project objects. How would you like the feature to work - Make the "workPerDate" under supported API version, as we will build downstream reporting functionality to fetch data from Workfront API fields and build additional reporting views and dashboards. Current Behaviour - "workPerDate" is under API unsupported version, which flags risks as we continue to build our dashboards, as the field has no support from Workfront and it could get discontinued unannounced.
The ability to duplicate a task across 2 projects would be really helpful. We have instances where we need the task in Project A to be in Project B and automatically update when anything changes (specifically dates and percent complete) in either place.
Description - The payload for patch call in the Update Segment Definition needs entire definition of the segment. It would be time taking and copy paste process to extract the definition of the segment and make the changes to the payload and resubmit as the patch. Instead, the patch solution should have been like Field Group "Patch" API call. Just what property we need to replace and the corresponding value. Why is this feature important to you - This feature helps to update only the relevant property of a segment definition without copying the complex PQL of the segment. How would you like the feature to work - The patch solution should have been like Field Group "Patch" API call. Just what property we need to replace and the corresponding value. { "op": "replace", "path": "/mergePolicyId", "value": "<revised Merge Policy ID>" } Current Behaviour - The Update API call requires entire definition of the segment along with PQL and other properties to be part of payload while changing the properties like merge policy etc.
Description - When using an Automate Worklflow in WF Proof, it would be more useful for a user to be added to current stage instead of a new WF Stage with no parameters on it. Why is this feature important to you - When users are added to the WF stage, the use of stage deadlines becomes useless and the proof remians open for them beyond what other users assigned to the proof are allowed. How would you like the feature to work - Current enters a proof through Workfront and could only be assigned to the stages that are present in the workflow. It would even better if you could limit them to a certain stage. For instance, if there were 3 stages in a workflow, someone may only be allowed in stage 1, where as other may only be allowed in Stage 2 and so on. If the deadline has passed for that stage then they could only have read only/reviewer access until the next version was added. This would keep the integrity of the review process in place and avoid comments being added and not reviewed by certain individuals in a stage that may have passed. Current Behaviour -If a user navigate to a proof and opens it via WF they are added to a random Workfront Stage with no deadline driven by the workflow.
Right now, there is no option to search or sort by folders in the filter tree in marketing activities. This is particularly frustrating when trying to identify shared folders. It would be nice to have a "folders" option in the filter tree, with the sub-option of "shared folders." There may be other sub-options that would be helpful as well - if you think of one feel free to comment it below!
I'd love the ability to drag/reorder column rules in a report, similar to how you can reorder custom forms on an object. Since the order of column rules is important to making them work when there is more than 1 rule in a column, like below example, often I have to play with them to order them the specific way I need. I currently have to trash the rules and create them again in a new order, I can't just drag them to reorder. It would be really helpful to just be able to easily reorder them without having to recreate them!
Description - Add HTTP API feature to external account Why is this feature important to you - More vendors are recommending and pushing HTTP API. More capabilities
Would be nice to have a lock on documents. This area for a certain project is for view only as reference on monthly basis and project manager does not want documents altered or deleted but view only. Instead of having to create difference access levels for Work license, it would beneficial if project owner could upload the necessary documents and lock them for view only no matter what license level.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: We noticed recently the new warning message added to AEM bulk edit scenario, where user attempt to “Select all” and edit these sub-pages in separate tabs. The warning message says that “Bulk action not supported, The selected action Edit(e) will only have effect X selected items currently loaded…”. As we understand, the justification for that warning message is to let user know that not all sub pages might have been lazy-loaded, and that’s fine. That also explains why the massage doesn’t need to appear when pages have been selected manually. The point is that the mentioned logic might be confusing when there are only few sub-pages to be selected by “select all”. In that case lazy logic is not the case and user can be sure that “select all” picks all the sub pages we have on the screen. Please consider extending that logic, because our customers feels uncomfortable with new behavior and confusing warning. (More detail you can find in thread for Case #E-000797571) Use-case: Changing this behavior will lead to better user experience. Also if some users often use Select all and Edit options together for smaller lists of sites it won't be that annoying. Current/Experienced Behavior: Open Sites Go to list of Pages where you have 6 elements Choose Select all elements Click Edit Warning about Selecting only visible items is displayed Improved/Expected Behavior: Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM OnPrem 6.5.15.0 Customer-name/Organization name: Robert Kmieciak/ Wunderman Thompson Technology Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Due to a recently discovered vulnerability in some browsers, password input fields and iframes loading external content must now set the spellcheck attribute to false. Some browsers with an enhanced spellcheck feature send password data to unintended sources if password unmasking is enabled (the “show password” checkbox next to a password box). To avoid accidental disclosure, the best practice is to disable spellcheck for all password fields and iframes regardless of "Show password" options. A team consuming our self-hosted visitor API package was issued an internal application security ticket because there were insecure iframe elements detected on their web pages that were actually being created by the package. To fix it, we added a new attribute to the iframe spellcheck and set it to false. The scope of this post is to recommend that iframes be sanitized with a `spellcheck="false"` flag in visitor API package. Background: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Global_attributes/spellcheck https://www.otto-js.com/news/article/chrome-and-edge-enhanced-spellcheck-features-expose-pii-even-your-passwords
In the new interface for email performance report setup, the selector/filter for emails has poor contrast against a white background (as in the image below). Can I suggest making the contrast of the highlighted/selected emails starker, so visually impaired users can navigate this with more ease?
I'm a studio/traffic manager overseeing a team of creatives with over x80 projects. We've created a report which lists all of the projects so we have an overview of them. Be great to be able to have a Kanban board view of all projects not just a project and task within that project. I can't be the only person to ask for this. Thx V
Many of our users find the My Updates area to be a great place for quickly reviewing things that require their attention. However, we have found that for some users, the Mentions area is not functioning as needed. Ideally, this area could be filtered or set to show only the conversations in which the user has been tagged or directly mentioned. Upon review of available documentation, we understand that conversations will be displayed if the user has been included. However, in addition to conversations in which the user has been tagged, this will also display conversations on objects that the user has created or assigned. We have designed our processes such that many of our users initiate work that flows between teams. Even though the work may leave their respective team, the conversations on those objects continue to fill their Mentions section, making the area useless. If filtering/settings are not possible at the user level, having a system setting that allows us to limit conversations in the Mentions section to direct mentions only would be very helpful!
For the Notifications box, we need to have an "Inbox" that works more like Outlook so you can archive messages once things are addressed, so the list gets shorter and you can focus better on things that need your attention or what needs action. Currently, all messages stay there forever (either bold as unread or unbold for read status), which is just overwhelming and not super useful. Asana provides a good example of this capability. If you have archiving capability, you will also want the ability to unarchive if you made a mistake.Also, need to have the ability to view the "update" notifications as a thread within the notifiation Inbox, silimar to how you can group Outlook by conversations if you choose.Just overall, need to have a way to organize, sort, group your notifications by type, action, etc, for further action, follow ups or reference at a later time.As it stands now, this feature is unusable and is causing more frustration for our users; also causing users to bounce between different tools to complicate things further.
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.
