Build better products with our product team
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Search on the same page DAM and Adobe Stock Assets using filters (DAM path, asset type, etc) Use-case: On the one page in AEM we can search for Adobe Stock. On the other page in AEM we can search DAM assets. Is it possible to search on the same page DAM and Adobe Stock Assets? Current/Experienced Behavior: it is not possible to search on the same page DAM and Adobe Stock Assets using filters (DAM path, asset type, etc) Improved/Expected Behavior: it is possible to search on the same page DAM and Adobe Stock Assets using filters (DAM path, asset type, etc) Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): https://author-p131706-e1282790.adobeaemcloud.com/ Customer-name/Organization name: Legrand Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Description - I LOVE (yes, that's uppercase!) the Web SDK "Data Variable" Data Element Type in conjunction with the "Update variable" action. Especially with the new UI, it looks almost exactly like AppMeasurement, even better. What I am missing is a way to initialize the DE in a similar way an "XDM object" can be defined directly in the Data Element section, to set an initial state, and which you can build upon in your rules to temporarily enhance it. After the rules have completed, the initial state is reset. In my current setup with the ACDL (Adobe Client Data Layer), I need a standalone rule that is listening to "all events" and runs before any other ACDL triggered rule that further updates the variable, just to achieve this functionality. Or am I missing a step / functionality? As a workaround, I could likely also create a "custom code" DE instead, that defines the core data structure as JS object, and can then be merged with the variable part and the result used instead. This would remove the need for an additional rule, but would also require you to be savvy enough to write that code yourself. Why is this feature important to you? - It creates the need for unnecessary workarounds to set the globally applied pieces on the DE. How would you like the feature to work? - The XDM object can also be defined in the Data Elements section, why not the variable data element as well?In the DE definition, why not already display the same UI that is presented in the update variable step? Current Behaviour - Cumbersome additional step/rule needed to set commonly used parts on the data element e.g., through a custom rule that runs before the actual page view or interaction rule
Hey all, I think it would be very helpful if filters in Smart Lists could link out to what's being referenced, instead of having to search to find what you're looking for. Basically, just link up what's highlighted in the screenshot. I know this would make my life easier on occasion. 😁 Also, if this has already been proposed, feel free to point me in the direction of that post. I wasn't able to find anything via search! Have a good one!
When templates are deactivated, they still show for non-admin users who the template was shared with. This is very confusing for our users and allows them to choose a deactivated template when creating a project. To prevent this, when I deactivate a template I also have to un-share it will all non-admin users, and this is an extra step that I don't think should happen. If a template is deactivated, I think it shouldn't show up for users.
There is a long-standing frustration with proofs that oftentimes approvers will make a comment in a proof but not make a decision. It would help to not let the person close a proof after making a comment without marking a decision IF they are an approver or reviewer/approver on the proof and are not in a proof where only 1 decision is required and has already been made.
Description - Currently, Launch/Tags does not support a tagging nor folder functionality, especially in big projects leaving it to the implementer to use naming conventions to keep things tidy Why is this feature important to you - especially big projects easily get messy How would you like the feature to work - add a tagging + filtering and/or folder creation possibility, similar to what GTM provides Current Behaviour - nothing similar
Description - Allow Workload Balancer's "Sort Project By" be sorted in reverse. For example, Priorities sort low to high. Allow it to sort from high to low, with high on top. Why is this feature important to you - The team is getting confused by having "low priority" on top of the list and "high priority" on the bottom. It would be more intuitive to sort the other way. How would you like the feature to work - An up/down arrow next to the Sort By field to dictate which direction it should go. Current Behaviour - There is no such feature at this time.
Description - Publishing Flow > [Development Environment] > Edit Library - Add a "Update all/selected to latest Revision" button. Why is this feature important to you - To more easily update everything in an existing build. How would you like the feature to work - Within Publish flow, a given Development Environment build, where I have Data Elements, Rules, Extensions I have added to the build, where I can edit/save/build environment (The "Edit Library" view). I would like a "Update all/selected to latest Revision" button, where I can select all/multiselect all Resources currently listed and press the button and it automatically selects the latest revision. In principle, this is similar to the "Add All Changed Resources" link at the bottom of the view, except only affect what is currently in the build or selected from checkboxes. Current Behaviour - There is no such functionality, other than the "Add All Changed Resources" link at the bottom of the view, which does have the above described effect, but also adds all other updated resources in the Property, which is not desirable in many cases.
Within Experience Cloud Data Collection (Launch), In the Publishing flow, I may have multiple Development Environment builds. I would like to have ability to either merge two existing builds to a single build. I imagine this to be on a Publishing flow level, with checkboxes on each build, and a "Merge" button at the top of the Development column. This would allow me to easily move everything from one or more builds into a single build. In addition, within a given build (where you can add/remove rules/DE's, Extensions, etc.) I would like to be able to select any/all existing items in the build and copy to another build. This would effectively me allow me to also do the first ask, but would still be nice to have both options. .josh
Description - The option from the analytics workspace to share a report with anyone has improved the end-user experience, one can easily interrogate the report by using dynamic filters, date range, etc. However, it might also be a good idea to have an option to download the data as CSV or save it as a PDF.Why is this feature important to you - This will improve intuitiveness.How would you like the feature to work - Just the same way as it works within the analytics workspaceCurrent Behaviour - Feature not available
I would like to be able to create a report that only shows data for projects I have favorited. This list would be dynamic as projects are added and removed from favorites over time. I don't own my projects, and I'm a resource on some projects that I'm not interested in tracking in detail. My favorites list is the list of projects I would like to appear in some of my reports.
Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: With AEM 6.4 SP8, Adobe introduced restriction that only members of the AEM administrator group could publish to the Brand Portal. This request is to align publishing permission for the Brand Portal with the standard replicate ACL. Use-case: An AEM Assets user--i.e. a designer or a marketer--completes work on an asset and would like to publish the asset to the Brand Portal. The administrator for AEM would like to be able to grant that user the permission to publish their assets to the Brand Portal without making them an administrator (and granting many permissions which are inappropriate for their role). Current/Experienced Behavior: Only members of the AEM administrators group can publish to the Brand Portal Improved/Expected Behavior: Users with replicate permissions on the asset or folder can publish to the Brand Portal Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): This is applicable since AEM 6.4 SP8 through AEM 6.5 SP11 as well as the current build of AEMaaCS Customer-name/Organization name: Apex Tool Group; Wakefern Screenshot (if applicable): Code package (if applicable):
Hi! Something that would be beneficial in my company would be an added version to locking proofs.Here is the scenario for me specifically:I send out a proof to a huge list of people (Stage 1)It automatically locks when the next stage starts.Stage 2 are the designers who review comments from Stage 1.I need Stage 2 to also be locked at the start of the stage (2). Stage 1 still needs to be able to review the proof at all times. Stage 2 doesn't need to make comments/approve anything. They want it locked so the designers don't accidentally change or delete anything. Having different locking variations would be really helpful in this situation.
It would be very helpful if someone has commented on a proof, then deletes their comment because it's not need anymore or they were mistaken, that the comment does not show up in the updates section OR has a line through it, something to show it was deleted. We have had a few times where people have left comments on a proof and then decided they weren't need anymore so they delete the comment, it doesn't show up on the proof, but it still shows up in the updates section. Without going into proofing activities, we have no way of knowing that the comment was deleted and think it still pertains to the current proof. It would be really nice if the comments are deleted, they are deleted everywhere, but if not possible, they have a red checkmark, line through them or something that would show in the updates, that this was deleted as well.
We have had a lot of issues troubleshooting a recent issue experienced in IE. Having an Adobe Experience Cloud Debugger for other browsers would have allowed us to be more efficient in our troubleshooting. This would also be helpful from an Analytics perspective.
I would like to be able to use Marketo's REST API to move Program(s) from Folder A (current) to Folder B (desired).Currently, there is no available API endpoint to do this operation, but it is crucial to a fully automated Archive process which maintains Program Member Data.I think this Marketo Nation post does a good job of describing the issue as well: https://nation.marketo.com/t5/product-discussions/rest-api-to-move-assets-move-email-program-frrom-folder-a-to/td-p/300009Ideally, I'd like there to be a POST "Move Programs" endpoint, but it might also be possible to accomplish this with the POST "Update Program Metadata" endpoint as well if a query parameter for "Folder" was added.Thanks for considering!
Description - Would like to have the availability to see the blocklist for email notifications from Workfront.Why is this feature important to you - recently I have been on a back and forth confirming emails are being sent through and getting the right SMTP request, however the problem was they were just on the blocklist and having the availability to that would make a quick fix.How would you like the feature to work - Availability to the block list to my instances and also the ability to add or remove user to that depending on my criteria for that instance as a system admin.Current Behaviour - Have to ask to check and edit that list from customer support
Description -We are interested in setting up the Sharepoint/Workfront integration. Instead of using the first 3 delegated permissions listed below, is it possible for Adobe to update their application to use just one delegated Microsoft Graph API permission called Sites.Selected? Have full access to your filesRead items in all site collectionsEdit or delete items in all site collectionsMaintain access to data you have given it access toView your basic profile Why is this feature important to you This would better adhere to the principle of least privileged access and would allow us to specify one or more SharePoint sites to use with the integration rather than allowing access to all files and sites that the signed-in user has access to. How would you like the feature to work To use just one delegated Microsoft Graph API permission called Sites.Selected? Current Behaviour Requires using all the permissions.
There seems to be a one-way interaction between the tasks in a project and the cards that represent tasks in Boards. The primary issue is that there does not seem to be a way to add cards to a board and have them show up back in projects. Having a hybrid way of managing tasks would be extremely beneficial. Limited options for visibility of data on cards The “auto” statuses that can be configured on columns don't include Group statuses - only global.Only have access to a limited set of filtersCan’t see Duration as a custom field to add within a cardExample form Project view editing: Example from Boards: How do boards show up in views and reports?The only thing I could find resulted in this: This button didn’t do anything useful.Looking at the project view is even more of mess: Why does it show me those fields if they’re supposed to be turned off?The view is “sticky” so it applies to whatever project you’re looking at even if you don’t want that view for that particular project. Switching the view back and forth is not an option when switching between projects.
Current Behaviour / Description - Both the project and individual user settings have an option to select a schedule. If you select the project setting to have option A (no holidays) and the individual user setting to have option B (company holidays), the project will not use the project setting option A if an individual user is assigned a task. If two or more people are assigned a task however, then the task will default to the project setting of option A. The reason the project setting works is due to the system project preferences: When multiple users are assigned to a task, use the schedule of the....Project. How would you like the feature to work - We should be able to use the project setting to override the individual user's setting. Why is this feature important to you - Users work on different types of projects. Some are more time sensitive that others so we should be able to select the schedule that works best for the project type. Additional Notes: This really becomes a problem with you have predecessors with long lag times or durations. Tasks can get pushed out pretty far from all the vacation and time off. Another idea would be to have the project exclude holidays and time off when calculating duration / lag time but avoid scheduling the actual due date on a holiday. For additional information, refer to: Case Number 00406587 - Schedule functionality not working as expected [ ref:!00D3006HBH.!5004X01z7BqB:ref ]
Have hover over text on the Drill-Down Tab stating to "select a row to Drill-Down"
In the Workload Balancer, although time off appears as diagonal lines in the box, the hours are not calculated/included in the resources' overall planned hours for a given day. It would be helpful as a Resource Manager to see the cumulated hours (which includes ie 1 or more hours). Right now, I have to go into the Resources' time off to confirm the hours they are taking and then account for that when assigning tasks.
Within our Salesforce-Marketo Sync, we sometimes need to resync a custom object. Sometimes it is because we've added a new field and need to populate it for every record, and sometimes it is because there are records active on the object in Marketo that have been deleted in Salesforce (and the sync somehow missed the deletion). To resync an object currently, you have to disconnect that object from every asset within Marketo where is has been referenced (smart list filters, campaign flow steps, etc.). This can mean going into hundreds of assets one-by-one and essentially breaking the logic by removing the relevant filters. This is not only time and resource intensive, but also very destructive. Once the object has been resynced, one has to go back to all of those assets, or at least those that are still in use, and add the relevant filters back. There should be a way to resync a SFDC custom object without disconnecting it from every asset.
On a frequent basis we often find that because we have so many segments and calculated metrics, we use them in so many different places and we change them so often it can become a bit of a nightmare to manage. A bit part of that is on us to find processes to manage them effectively however something did occur to me which would make this 1,000 times easier... versioning!Similar to the file control you have on One Drive or Dropbox the ability to see the history / changes that have been made and revert to them if you want. It would mean when we change a segment and something breaks we can chose to revert or create a new segment based on the old one. Currently that version of the segment is just overwritten and we can find ourselves scratching our heads and wasting time testing to work out what it was before.
A project should be able to reference a previously existing Request Queue to use as its own structure for requests made within the project. Currently, each project has its own Queue Details, Queue Topics, and Routing Rules. A project that already exists should be able to lean on the Queues that already exist and house the new requests when created. This would be convenient when requesting a new task within a project.
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.
