Build better products with our product team
The current state is that we have to create users first on Adobe Admin Console in order to control that the user will be created as Federated ID. Unfortunately, one of the many disappointing things about Adobe Admin Console is that it can randomly create the user as Federated ID or Adobe ID if the user creation originates from Workfront. As we were also forced into Adobe Admin Console and there is already an Adobe Admin Console Systems administrator, we can only get Product Administrator access levels on Adobe Admin Console which does not provide access to the logs. The problem occurs in that when other product administrator or the Adobe Admin Console Systems Administrator creates/deletes a user on Adobe Admin Console, these appear as if actioned by the main Workfront systems administrator in the workfront logs which becomes an audit issue. We can't refer to the Adobe Admin Console logs quickly as that would require requesting from the Adobe Admin Console systems administrator every time we need to figure out a user creation/deletion log. While Adobe is aware that this is an issue and they are looking to rename the log to say system administrator in the long run, there is no ETA on this fix. I am writing this Idea to get this bug(!)/feature fixed as I don't understand how this is acceptable as an audit issue.
Description - Workers are accidentally tagging the wrong people in their tasks or comments field and it's difficult to remove that tag unless you delete the comment then re-post. Why is this feature important to you - The wrong people could possibly reading information they shouldn't be seeing. How would you like the feature to work - Be able to remove the tag without having to delete the comment. Current Behaviour - We're not able to remove the tag without deleting the comment then reposting.
DescriptionI would like to have the ability to create blueprints of objects within my Workfront instance that can be easily shared with other sister agencies. For example, instead of exporting project templates as Excel files and emailing them for manual recreation, I would like to share 2-4 project templates as blueprints that can be directly imported into another Workfront instance.Why is this feature important?This feature is crucial because it significantly reduces time and effort, increasing efficiency and productivity. It eliminates repetitive manual processes and ensures consistency across instances, fostering better collaboration between teams and agencies.How should the feature work?Workfront could introduce a dedicated "Share" section within Blueprints that allows users to:Select project templates, including associated custom forms, assignments, predecessors, and constraints, to compile into a blueprint.Export the blueprint as a file that can be shared externally.Import the blueprint into another Workfront instance, where the recipient can:Open the blueprint in their Blueprints section.Adjust assignments, custom form fields, and other configurations as needed.Save the blueprint as a project template within their instance.This streamlined workflow would empower teams to collaborate more effectively while preserving template integrity.Current BehaviorCurrently, I need to manually export project templates as Excel files, email them to the recipient, and have them:Copy and paste task names into their instance.Manually recreate assignments, predecessors, constraints, and custom forms from scratch.This process is time-consuming, error-prone, and inefficient.
Description -When you update a calculated field on a custom form, the change to the calculated field is not changed in other custom forms where the same field is used. The calculated field needs to get updated in each custom form it is used in. Workfront Support Response > "After speaking with my team and running some tests, this is currently working as designed, and why we recommend copying the calculation into the instructions of the field settings so they can be copied and pasted into the calculation after it is added to the new form. Currently, if you update the calculation in one form it will not carry over to another form where that field lives." REF: Case Number 00431554 Why is this feature important to you -Having to update a custom calculated field in multiple forms adds to the administrative burden and can lead to user error or inconsistencies in the calculated value across forms. How would you like the feature to work -Calculated fields should work like all other custom fields. Updates to the fields show be universal to all the forms it is used in.
Right now if data in a field is long it wraps and extends the length of the line item on reports and in views. I would love to be able to undue this wrapping when I want to to make it easier to view lists with the same spacing between each line. This works that way when you turn on the Gantt view so perhaps it could work similarly or just be extended to work on button push or by default setting in a report or view.
Description - I'm looking for a way to track which users are using the Mobile App at my company. Why is this feature important to you - Data that shows me if people are using the mobile appHow would you like the feature to work - I'd like to be able to see if they have logged into the mobile space and are using it at all. Current Behaviour - No data available.
Customers have asked to be able to have issues automatically convert to a project. The selections from the custom form on the request would essentially map to a corresponding template. For teams that get a large amount of requests this can be very beneficial to automate and remove the manual step of converting each issue individually.
Can an identifier be added to the issue overview form that depicts whether a request was submitted as new or if the submitter utilized the copy and submit as new function. I would love to be able to reference this when troubleshooting with submitters, but our internal COE teams would find this valuable when validating metadata in the forms. I would also like to be able to report on this to see the usage across submitters. Today there is no way of telling when a request is new or the copy and submit as new function is used.
DescriptionEnable the ability to convert a Paragraph custom field into a Text with Formatting field. This functionality would provide users with the flexibility to copy and paste formatted text from other applications and format requirements directly within Workfront using bullets, numbering, bold text, etc.Why is this feature important?This feature enhances user efficiency and maintains consistency within the Workfront instance by:Allowing users to format project requirements or other data directly in the field, reducing reliance on external tools.Eliminating the need to create duplicate fields just to add formatting capabilities, saving time and minimizing administrative overhead.Retaining existing custom fields without requiring redundant work to migrate data to newly created fields.How should the feature work?Within the Custom Form Builder:Click on an existing Paragraph custom field.In the field properties/attributes, navigate to the Display Type dropdown.Change the field type from Paragraph Text Field to Text Field with Formatting.Upon conversion, Workfront should:Preserve all existing live data as plain text (i.e., no formatting will be applied retroactively).Allow new data to utilize the formatting options available in Text Field with Formatting.This streamlined approach avoids data loss while expanding formatting capabilities for future entries. (See attachment for a dropdown screenshot.)Current BehaviorCurrently, this functionality does not exist. Users must create a new Text Field with Formatting, manually migrate data, and delete the original Paragraph field—an inefficient and time-consuming process.
DescriptionIn Customer Journey Analytics, dimensions can be configured to use a date-time schema data type. For example, a dimension showing when a product was added to wishlist could use this data type. Despite dates being akin to numbers, they cannot be used with greater than and less than operators in fitlers. The recommendation is to allow for this type of functionality. Why is this feature important to youAllowing the use of operators on dimensions that use a date-time data type would be useful for filter creation. For example, let's say that a user wanted to see a list of customer IDs that added a product to a wishlist between September 20, 2023, and October 20, 2023. A dimension exists that captures the date that a product was added to a wishlist (Dimension 1), and the dimension's values are in date-time format. If filter operators worked with date-time dimensions, the user could build a filter with logic similar to "greater than or equal to Dimension 1 = Sep 20, 2023, and less than or equal to Dimension 1 = Oct 20, 2023". Currently, the user would have to list out 31 different dimension values to cover each of the dates from Sep 20, 2023, and Oct 20, 2023. How would you like the feature to workTreat dimension values with a date-time data type as numbers, which will allow greater than, less than, etc. operators to be used. Current BehaviourDimensions with date-time data types do not currently work with operators.
Hello, we are missing the GZIP format in the Datawarehouse export, because just as Data Feed exports in GZIP, the processes that we have set up to drink from both sources, would help if they had the same format.Greetings and thank you very much,
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Please add adjustible columns in the UI for Launchess so that you can resize if necessary in case title is shortened Use-case: As an editor I want to find my launches here quickly. Normally you look for the launch title. But the title is cutted after specific amount of characters and you can not distinguish between those which beginning with same letters. Current/Experienced Behavior: Columns are fixed. You can not adjust the width of the columns in order to see shortened/cutted label like the title! Even on 'on hover' is missing! Improved/Expected Behavior: Just make the columns adjustable like in other view. It's so easy!!! Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Carl Zeiss AG Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - Adding a superscript of "F" to notate a field is in use in a Fusion scenario.Why is this feature important to you - We have had a few instances where the field name was changed causing the Fusion scenario to stop. This field indicator will alert the user to coordinate the change with Fusion before implementing the name change.How would you like the feature to work - Indicator on the Field object that reads: Used in Fusion, user would check box to indicate field is being used in a Fusion scenario. The field name would display with a superscript of "F" to notate the use in a Fusion scenario.Current Behaviour - Updating an excel spreadsheet to track.
With all the focus on keeping spam complaints low it would be great if there was a way to track spam complaints on the campaign level instead of having to create a smart list looking for spam complaints and then having to dive into the activity log to find the campaigns.Spam complaints per email send should be visible like any other metrics on an email performance report and the email tab for each campaign - count and percentage.
I have done AB testing for multiple campaigns. Subject lines, whole emails and Send Name. Now I want to create a detailed reporting for all the campaigns. I want to drill down analysis like winners in each. Is there any way to extract the report which shows the winners too. How to do this?
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Delete page in author should auto unpublish the page. Use-case: Content authors who are new to AEM are deleting the pages without unpublishing them, assuming it will reflect the on actual site. Page is deleted in author but not in publish or in live site. Current/Experienced Behavior: Deleting page on author stays on author without unpublishing it. Improved/Expected Behavior: Expected it to auto publish the page if author deletes the page. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Customer-name/Organization name: Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - Would like a stopwatch or timer feature available in WF (available in multiple locations). Why is this feature important to you - Our developers and editorial staff are requesting this and think it's a huge miss that WF doesn't have this feature when SO many other PM sites have it. How would you like the feature to work - Start, stop, pause, record to timesheet features Current Behaviour - Our time is using their phones or purchased stop watches to do this and want it within WF.
Description - Allow hours to be allocated by day, week, month in the allocations of the unassigned hours space in the workload balancer on job role assignments.Why is this feature important to you - Our resource managers need to manage upcoming time that could have tasks with hours that vary by day that need to be marked out on a job role for future assignment.How would you like the feature to work - Just as the assigned area can we have the hours in monthly, daily, weekly view to be able to be edited by doubleclicking or by clicking the three-dot menu and clicking edit allocationsCurrent Behaviour -Currently you can only assign job roles and put total planned hours in, the system will average the time but will not allow you to edit the daily allocations.
Description - The auto collection logic for xdm.timestamp field in the AEP SDK is currently dependent on the user’s local system time. This reliance on system time creates inconsistencies in event tracking and reporting (event timestamps show up way in past or future at times which means they are offset as compared to actual event time). This improvement proposes syncing the xdm.timestamp field to a centralized server-side clock, such as UTC, ensuring uniformity and accuracy in time data.Why is this feature important to you - Accurate and consistent timestamps are crucial for reliable event tracking, analytics, and reporting. Without this feature, data may be skewed due to discrepancies in user device clocks, clock skew or drift, or manual adjustments to system time. This impacts the quality of insights derived from event data. By syncing the timestamp to a server-side clock, the platform ensures more reliable and consistent data, making it easier to correlate events, generate accurate reports, and analyze user behavior.How would you like the feature to work - The xdm.timestamp field should automatically be synced to a server-side clock (e.g., UTC) at the point when an event is logged, regardless of the user's local system time. The SDK should request the server time whenever an event is triggered, and the server will provide an accurate timestamp to be used instead of the device’s local time.In the event of network issues or server downtime, a fallback mechanism could use the local system time to avoid event loss, but with clear flagging of the fallback event for potential time data issues.The feature should be seamless and require no additional action from the user or client-side developers once integrated into the SDK.Current Behaviour - The xdm.timestamp field relies on the local system time of the user's device. This results in discrepancies for reasons like if a user changes the time on their device manually or if there are differences in system clock accuracy. This can lead to inconsistencies in event timing, causing difficulties in correlating data, performing time-based analysis, and generating accurate reports.
This would be helpful to copy a web property from one Launch company to another Launch company in Experience Cloud with different IMS Org Ids.
Be able to set a status in the approval process so that when the project task or issue is approved the predefined status is set.
Description - We have some requests that come in with a lot of documents attached. Many times it's 1-2 but can be up to 20 and the user isn't savvy enough to create a .zip file. The issue is further compounded when we find an error in the documents (i,e. requester uses the wrong logo and all of them need to be redone. Why is this feature important to you - it would increase efficiencies for both the requester and the team working on the request as the documents would need to be viewed one at a time or reviewed to remove duplicates or version after the fact. ASide from reading the whole list and looking at the date uploaded, there's no easy way to clean the files up so the current version is used. How would you like the feature to work - It would be a great feature to provide an error/flag message to the person uploading when the file they are uploading is already in the Documents Section asking them if they want to replace it (automatically creating a new version on top of the old) or provide instructions to drag/drop the new version over the top. Current Behaviour - Massive list of files only in the Document section
Description: The current process of uploading IP BOT rules is manual and repetitive. When updating multiple report suites, each suite must be selected individually. An API or tool that allows for the bulk upload of the latest IP BOT rules to all report suites would save a significant amount of time.Why is this feature important: The current process is both manual and redundant. Even using the 'Control' button to select multiple report suites is time-consuming. A more efficient method for bulk uploads would greatly reduce the time required.How the feature should work: We should be able to add all the latest IPs to the BOT file and then have an option to update all the report suites within the organization.Current Behaviour: The BOT rules must be manually selected and uploaded for each report suite.
DescriptionI would like to be able to choose one or several attributes as Journey Exit Criteria. Why is this feature important to youThis feature is important because I don't necessarily want to create more audiences since it takes more time to do that and I'm also concerned about the audience guardrails.I don't want to have to create a custom event since it's more time consuming and requires different roles/competence/AJO permissions to do. How would you like the feature to workI would like to use attribute as exit criteria by using operators to either say that the attribute should equal a defined value or be more/less than a defined value or be compared to another attribute or to a certain date or time. Also, being able to say that if a profile's attribute changes in any way from the time the profile enters the journey, then the profile should exit the journey.
機能改善要求（RFE）概要： twitter:cardを指定できる機能の追加 ユースケース： X (twitter)で情報を拡散させる際、OGP画像を大きく表示させたい（summary_large_imageを指定したい） 現在／体験した動作： og:imageの画像が表示され、画像が小さく、目立たない 改善／期待される動作： summary_large_imageを指定することにより、画像が大きく表示され、情報拡散に有利 環境の詳細（AEM バージョン／サービスパック、もしあればその他の詳細）： 顧客名／組織名 Maki_yam スクリーンショット（ある場合） コードパッケージ（ある場合）
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.
