Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: There is an OOTB function CQ.I18n.getDictionary() to get translations, but it always gets the whole dictionary to the UI, which puts much load on the visitor's browser. This reuest is to provide a function that retrieves only the requested translations. E.g. it could accept key name(s) and language name as parameters. Use-case: Use localized strings in custom JS code on user-facing pages. Current/Experienced Behavior: Improved/Expected Behavior: Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5 with SP8 Customer-name/Organization name: Veeam Software Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Rollout and publish the rolledout pages. Use-case: A feature in the OOB toolbox that will enable the authors to rollout a page. As a summary of the rollout we need to display which are all the pages that are affected along with a publish button by the side of the list. Rightnow, the author is unaware of what are the pages that affected by the rollout. Publishing each page after the rollout is very difficult. Current/Experienced Behavior: we dont have an option in the sites.html to rollout a page. Improved/Expected Behavior: We need to check if the page is a blueprint or not and conditionally display a button that says "rollout and publish". Once rollout operation is completed the author should be able o see a list of pages affected by the rollout and need a publish button so that the rolledout pages can be published without hastle. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Abinaya/Perficient Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Component specific client-library in ui.frontend project and better dependency management for client libraries. Use-case: 1. Currently, all the code written in ui.frontend will be bundled as 2 client libraries i.e: clientlib-site and vendors. These client libraries will be loaded in all pages. There is no way to selectively load only certain components OOTB. This leads to sub-optimal lighthouse scores because unused CSS and JS code on page. Hence, there has to be modularity in the clientlibs generated from ui.frontend project. This can be achieved through proper webpack configurations 2. Currently there are two ways to load client libraries i) At template level: This is recommended because it ensures all CSS wil be loaded at the top (in head) and all JS will be loaded at the bottom. But this gives rise to unused JS and CSS code on page as there is no option to include only those clientlibs which is needed on a particular page. ii) At component level: This ensures that only required CSS/JS will be loaded. If a particular component is not loaded, corresponding CSS/JS will not load. But, with this approach render blocking CSS and JS code is loaded in body tag which is not recommended. Hence there needs to be an approach to fix both of this performance issues. If there can be a way to dynamically load client libs (and its dependencies) based on components present on page, this will highly improve page performance. Current/Experienced Behavior: All ui.frontend code is bundled into 1 single clientlib and is loaded on all pages Single vendor client contains many dependencies which may not be required in all pages Loading clientlibs at template level causes unused JS/CSS to be present on pages. If loaded at component level it causes render blocking calls hampering the performance. Improved/Expected Behavior: ui.frontend should have modular structure and there should be component specific client libs. Vendor clientlib should be generate dynamically to include only necessary dependencies Ability to load only required clientlibs on page at component level. Also these clientlibs need to be loaded in 1 single request. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEM 6.5.x Customer-name/Organization name: Mindtree Screenshot (if applicable): Explanation: Without optimization: Clientlibs loaded at component level. With optimization: I have used an interceptor to group all CSS in head section and all JS to the bottom of the body tag. Code package (if applicable):
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: When trying to move or rename a not-published page, authors without publish permissions can successfully move/rename the page, but it enters a "Request to complete Move operation" workflow. Authors who depend on using workflows on their pages cannot use a workflow on the page as they normally would until they contact an administrator to intervene. Authors who do not depend on workflows are confused by the workflow. When trying to delete a not-published page, authors without publish permissions can only kind-of delete a page. The page appears to be deleted in the list of pages and some site navigation, but is not actually deleted. It can still be viewed by going directly to the URL. Its name can never be reused without contacting an administrator for intervention. Steps to reproduce: 1. Create a new user that has read+write, but not publish access to wknd demo or other site 2. Impersonate this user 3. Create a new page, do not activate 4. Move or rename the page 5. Note the page is moved/renamed, but the page is stuck in a "Request to complete move operation" workflow 6. Create another new page, do not activate 7. Delete the new page, it appears to be deleted 8. Try to create a new page with the same name, observe the name cannot be used 9. Go to the "deleted" page, it is visible when it should be deleted 10. Go to the deleted page in CRXDE as administrator, it is present, but with "deleted" property I have demonstrated those steps in a video here: https://buffalo.box.com/s/94nuwdwmgyctw6fo2sfu2hb4npfze1ti Use-case: Current/Experienced Behavior: Improved/Expected Behavior: Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): 6.5 SP10 Customer-name/Organization name: University at Buffalo Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
The only class that is specific to the field type is on the input element itself, but I want to style the LABELS of the inputs differently depending on the type. I could probably even manage if I could switch the label in the DOM to come AFTER the input using input[type=...] ~ label... but you know what would be easier??... including a class on the wrapper... PLEASE!! e.g. <div class="mktoFieldWrap MKTO-FIELD-SELECT"> ← ADD A NEW CLASS HERE!!! <label for="foo" id="Lblfoo" class="mktoLabel mktoHasWidth" style="width: 100px;"> Select one:</label> <div class="mktoGutter mktoHasWidth" style="width: 10px;"></div> <select id="foo" name="bar" aria-labelledby="Lblfoo" class="mktoField mktoHasWidth mktoValid" style="width: 150px;" aria-invalid="false"> <option value="">Select...</option> <option value="foo">Foo</option> <option value="bar">Bar</option> </select> <span id="foo" tabindex="-1" class="mktoInstruction"></span> <div class="mktoClear"></div> </div>
Would like to enhance the UI of a large dropdown list so users know that it's searchable. For example: pre-populate the beginning drop down field with the words "start typing" (or another indicator) to prompt users to begin typing their choice so they know it's possible to search via text and their only option isn't to to sort through 100s of entries using drop down function only.
Sometimes, we will want a task to have to be approved by any 2 individuals out of a larger group. For example, there are 5 people who can potentially approve a task, and we consider the task to be approved after any 2 of those people (doesn't matter who) have approved.Right now, it seems to be "all or nothing". You can check the box for "Only one approval decision required", or you can uncheck it and then everyone needs to approve. Instead of having this checkbox, it would be great if we could specify the number of decisions required.It would be even better if you could also set this within each approver group. For example, a task needs to be approved by both Team A and by Team B. Team A requires 2 of its people to approve and Team B requires only 1 of it's people to approve. The advantage of this that, when new people join a team, you can just add them to the team, versus adding them as an individual approver on a bunch of tasks.
When creating a Template from a Project, Issues should carry over into the Template, just like Tasks , including assignments.
When looking at a Project's Task list the arrow inside the Name column has a very tiny hit box making it easy to mistakenly click either the Name title label or select the row. Increasing the hit box to make it easier to click the arrow would be idea.
I'm struggling with getting some of my users to use the Work List. I've run into a number of situations where users weren't aware they had any tasks to work on because they didn't specifically have Tasks AND Ready to Start selected.In an example scenario, when Approvals (1), Working On (4), and Ready to Start (4) are checked, only the Approval displays. I was told this is because Tasks would also need to be selected. What I would like to see, and what would be helpful for our users, would be if the filters are arranged into subgroups vs a seemingly random order, for instance:Approvals (8)Tasks (32)Ready to Start (16)Working On (4)Not Ready (4)Complete (8)Requests (12)Ready to Start (1)Working On (4)Not Ready (4)Complete (3)Personal (3)Ready to Start (1)Working On (0)Not Ready (0)Complete (2)
Description - Ability to view the S3 configuration that is set up as destination to Adobe Campaign.Why is this feature important to you - To troubleshoot or even to know which bucket you are sharing segments for Campaign, you can easily find details of the destination account. How would you like the feature to work - When you browse the account, click on edit account details should show the bucket name and folder path. Current Behavior - Not able to see the destination account besides the access key. Understand the access key is associated with a specific bucket, but people don't remember the bucket name by its access key.
The "handle" to increase the width of a column in a table view is very small and makes it hard to quickly grab and adjust the width of a table's column. Increasing the targetable area would make adjusting the columns much easier.
Looking to see if a indicator can be added as the first column to a rule to show what kind of "Event Type" the rule has. Something on the lines of what Adobe Target currently offers for their different types of activity.Additionally if a filter can also be created to narrow down all page load rules, DCRs etc besides the existing ones (Status:Enabled / Disabled), that would be great.
There is a FUNDAMENTAL NEED to have a year over year percent change column for metrics listed vertically (in the order we want them listed) with current year first, prior year second, % change column third For example: metric name: Period A current year totals : Period B prior year totals : % change differencemetric name: Period A current year totals : Period B prior year totals : % change differencemetric name: Period A current year totals : Period B prior year totals : % change differencemetric name: Period A current year totals : Period B prior year totals : % change difference If anyone out there has achieved this please let me know how you did it.
Description - WORKSPACES IS VERY USELESS WHEN TRYING TO LOAD LARGE AMOUNTS OF DATA TO BE DELIVERED IN SCHEDULED EMAILSWhy is this feature important to you - THE COMPANY STAKEHOLDERS NEED TO SEE ALL THE DATA THEY WAY THEY WANT TO SEE IT AND NOT JUST WHAT ADOBE WANTS TO SHOW THEM IN HOW ADOBE WANTS TO SHOW IT IN SCHEDULED EMAILSHow would you like the feature to work - GIVE US THE ABILITY TO RETURN AS MANY ROWS AS WE WANT TO SEE IN WORKSPACE REPORTS SETUP TO DELIVER AS SCHEDULED EMAILS AND/OR GIVE US THE ABILITY TO SORT DATA IN DESCENDING ORDER IN DATA WAREHOUSE.Current Behaviour - WE CAN ONLY RETURN 400 ROWS IN AUTO EMAILED REPORTS. AND TRYING TO SEND DATA WAREHOUSE REPORTS FOR INTERNAL SEARCH TERMS WITH INTERNAL SEARCH COUNTS IS USELESS BECAUSE DATA WAREHOUSE WILL NOT GIVE US THE ABILITITY TO SORT IN DESCENDING ORDER, IT JUST RETURNS UGLY REPORTS AS ZIP FILES THAT THEN HAVE TO BE OPENED AND SORTED MANUALLY. MY REPORTS GO TO COMPANY OWNERS, THEY PAY A GOOD AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR THIS TOOL SO THE TOOL SHOULD GIVE US THE OPTIONS TO GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT.
Hello Team,We identified that Report filter "does not contain" allows only 1 word. Request you modification in the filter so that it allows multiple option to enter word.Best Regards,Pranav Kulkarni
Description - Ability to send email notifications to the subscribed emails when the data flow run fails or succeeds. Why is this feature important to you - It is easier to set up alerts for data flow monitoring via email inbox instead of logging to console and check for status. How would you like the feature to work - Allow the ability to set up an alert based on flow name or by status and subscribe to individual or group email ids. Email notifications should be delivered to their inbox. Current Behavior - Currently the subscribe option sends alerts to the UI and you need to be logged into AEP to view the alerts.
Would like to be able to save the Gantt view for a project so that whenever you enter that project task view it will automatically come up with the Gantt. Currently today you have to click on the Gantt each time to get it to come up.
If you start typing in a cell within a report and then navigate to a different webpage without clicking somewhere blank on the screen, you will lose that information. If the webpage had an autosave function which admins could turn on and off, this would mitigate this issue.
Description - While looking at the dataflow runs that are completed, the UI should be able to sort the runs by Last Flow Run date/Status and filter by Flow Name.Why is this feature important to you - If there are many data flows, easier way to look at the most recent data flow runs and the status of runs for a specific data flow. How would you like the feature to work - Add the sort capability to the last flow run date and by status or by last flow name. On the left hand side, there is a filter by Source. There should be a filter by data flow name so you can look at all the runs associated with it.Current Behavior - Currently able to sort the list by dataflow create date which is not helpful. Not very often we need to look at the dataflows when it was created.
Currently you cannot add existing uploaded Document objects to a new version of existing Proofs. You must firt download the document and then upload it to a new version of teh proof.It woull save a lot of time to be able to select multiple uploaded documents from the document area to an existing proof hat requires a new version.
It's great that we now have the option to add/remove the Documents upload section on requests but it would be nice if it were down on the Queue Topic level, rather than the entire Queue level. There are some topics that we really don't need the Document Upload section cluttering up, but it is useful for other topics within the same larger Queue project.
An easy way to upload word and excel documents as a proof and make the changes live and then execute all the changes in the word document.Adding annotation to an online proof, then require someone to go an make these comments onto the actual word document - it's an inefficient use of resources when the changes will be accepted.Ideally it would allow to track the changes and then an option to apply the changes onto the actual file.
We need greater flexibility across the system in managing documents. Specifically in the project and task documents tab. USE CASE: Currently the only way to move a document from a project to a task is to download the file and re-upload it to the task/documents area. The system then pushes the document back up the project document level regardless. This creates multiple version of the same file which I would guess is eating up storage space and causing confusion. It would be great if we could link a document stored in the global documents area to a project or a task. A use case for us is where we need to send a specific document along with supporting documents to be proofread by a user. Currently we have to download that assets from the system, and re-upload them to the task level/documents area. Once this task closes, the documents are lumped in with the rest of the project documents and association with the task is lost.
In The "DAM upload request" is there a way for the due dates entered in the calendars to send an alert to parties involved. It is great that we can add the due date but an email notification would be really super.
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.
