Build better products with our product team
Description -We'd really like to be able to lock down the ability to delete proof comments from certain users. Why is this feature important to you -We have our Compliance teams beginning to use Workfront and would love to be able to "lock down" this particular ability to meet regulatory requirements/guidelines. But we don't want to lock it down system wide/for other roles in other departments. How would you like the feature to work -Ideally I'd be able to toggle the ability to delete comments on or off a proof profile. Current Behavior -Currently you can only toggle this feature on/off system wide, there is no way to customize by user/etc.
Description - As far as I understand in the settings for an access level, I can restrict if users can only see other users from their company and additionally from the primary company. I would like to have the possibility to restrict users to see users from their company and other users, who are als members of any team / group these users are in.Why is this feature important to you - Users of companies other than the main company should be able to interact with users of other companies, but only with users with whom they have a specific defined connection.How would you like the feature to work - A third option under People in other companies should only view users from..., meaning "Groups / Teams they are also members of".Current Behaviour - Currently if the option Their Company is activated, only users of their company are visible. Setting the option The Primary Company extends this functionality to all users of the primary company.
Since Workfront changed the keyboard shortcuts to indent tasks from tab to Option+>, it's been really inefficient to quickly add new tasks to project templates. With the latest release, it's no longer possible to indent or outdent tasks during the creation of a task. A user now needs to add a new task, click out of it, then indent or outdent, which adds an extra step and slows you down. Aside from the keyboard shortcuts no longer working for templates, the indent/outdent options do not appear while you are creating a new task.
Hi Adobe Product team - this idea has been raised previously multiple times with no response so raising it again. While there are APIs available for Properties and Hosts, , currently there's no API that allows us to get names of workspaces. Workspaces are integral part of Adobe Target now and most of the other APIs return "workspace-IDs" in the response. End-users cannot understand the "IDs" which leads us to build custom solutions like a lookup table which is not an efficient solution. We'd like to have an API that returns: 1. Workspace IDs 2. Corresponding workspace name 3. Optional - all property-IDs where this workspace has been used Thanks in advance Regards Rajneesh
Description - Similar to how we can leverage the Blocklist to remove attributes or segments that should not influence AI models, it would be helpful if we could add 'weight' to other attributes/segments to help the model identify likely influential data. There are times when we think certain segments are likely to be a component to influence the models. My hypothesis is that by weighting these, it could help models that may be otherwise struggling to fully form.Why is this feature important to you - We have found in some situations where the AI was not able to generate working models with specific influential attributes and I'm wondering if this might help? I realize this may be slightly contradictory to how the model is supposed to workHow would you like the feature to work - Could work similar to blocklist via the APICurrent Behaviour - No current ability to add emphasis to attributes or segments for AI models
Description - We have been trialling a number of Auto-Allocate/Target activities and we have unearthed that due to our geographical position we are unable to separate specific market/environment activities from the default environment when there are multiple environments present. The attempts to trial market specific activities results indicate that AI does not have an impact and the added reports (Pers. Insights/Important Attributes reports) not present. With the current documentation outlining that any activity that incorporates the default and another environment that it outlines the hits and conversions are 'Considered' but essentially requests are all served by the default environment. Why is this feature important to you - It is important to be able to run the AI tools within Target that are not reliant on using and including the default environment which is a huge limitation for us. This enables market separation when launching a new AI delivered activity. How would you like the feature to work - When creating a new Auto-Target/Allocate/Personalisation activity having the option to determine which markets/environments for the activities models to be based on(Single or Multiple). Currently any test has to include the default, each of the activities should be dependant on the environment/market you want to run an activity on or on multi environment activities to select what environment is the decisioning source. Current Behaviour - We are currently using Auto-Allocate and Auto-Target, and whilst we have seen success in these tools we've observed and proven that the tools are not usable if you use within markets other than the default environment. For those users who work geographically and want to launch specific experiences for specific markets we are unable to without including the default environment, even then the data from the market is only 'Considered' as apart of the model not a decisioning element.
Description - It would be super helpful if we could paste a screengrab in Updates rather than having to save down an image somewhere and then link to it. Often times it's just a quick visual needed to get a point acrossWhy is this feature important to you - we spend more time saving an image to sharepoint, copying the link and pasting it into an update than it would take to copy and paste directly from a snipping tool into the update wysiwyg box.How would you like the feature to work - copy and paste directly from a snipping tool into the update wysiwyg boxCurrent Behaviour - saving an image to sharepoint, copying the link and pasting it into an update
Description -We need the ability to copy and paste a section of an Excel spreadsheet in an update. Why is this feature important to you -This adds multiple steps to our day to day process and we need to paste parts of a excel table 50+ times a day. How would you like the feature to work -Be able to paste rows from a excel spreadsheet into a update.Current Behaviour -
Description - in the current Analytics extension's set variables action, one can only add known events, and those only one by one. It would be amazing if one could just have a data element that can be passed in here, that holds a comma-separated events list e.g., coming from a lookup table Why is this feature important to you - the current UI is great if everything is static, but sometimes it would save a lot of time/rules if could just have a single data element that holds the logic, and the extension takes care of the rest i.e., add the values contained in the list in the linkTrackEvents, the same way it does for the individually set events How would you like the feature to work - add an input field for the list. The field can be populated with the standard percent placeholder for Data Elements (database symbol) Current Behaviour - one by one events to be added
When creating a Custom Form - Just like the TEXT and PARAGRAPH fields have 3 different width size options to choose from, you need that for the CALCULATED FIELD as well. My company pulls in large paragraphs of text into the Calculated Field and the width of that field box is standard, can't make it larger. Very limiting and not user-friendly.
Tasks on the homepage will only appear for workers on their Work List if they are listed as the Primary Assignee. We often have more than one person assigned to a task and they all need to be able to see when it's with them to work on.
Description - AEP sandbox Tooling to support moving incremental changesWhy is this feature important to you - To avoid manual changes to the sandbox components like schema between sandboxesHow would you like the feature to work - Support moving incremental changesCurrent Behaviour - When the object e.g. schema already exists in the target sandbox, there is no way to move the incremental changes in the schema.
Description - Ability to assign different sandbox/schema in the Adobe Launch/Tag XDM objectWhy is this feature important to you - We need to leverage different sandbox environment according to the Launch/Tag environmentHow would you like the feature to work - Able to assign a mapping of Launch environments to the AEP sandboxes/schema in the XDM object UI.Current Behaviour - You can only select a single sandbox/schema. So after picked development sandbox/schema in the XDM object UI, it won't be able to change automatcially to Prod sandbox when the Launch property is published to production. Please also refer to https://experienceleaguecommunities.adobe.com/t5/adobe-experience-platform/adobe-launch-tag-environments-and-aep-sandboxes/td-p/669279
Currently, project managers don't receive email notifications when someone posts an update or a comment on their project, unless they are tagged. This makes them miss important updates. It would be great to receive these email notifications as well. This would help them stay on top of the progress. Plus, provide a setting to turn this on or off these notifications in the user profile notifications area.This feature could also apply to tasks/issues, but only for primary assignments.
Description - I would like the posting update part of the plugin to put attachments into the documents portion of the object (which it does today), but take any imbedded pics in the email and make them images directly in the update instead of converting them to documents. This would allow users to read the updates on the object and not have to go to documents to see the images. Current Behaviour - Using the plugin to post an update to a project/task/issue, converts imbedded pictures in the email to documents on the object
Description - it would be nice to be able to add more than 4000 characters to the Description field when pushing an email from Outlook to Workfront using the add-on / plugin. Why is this feature important to you - many emails are longer than the 4,000 character limit, and sometimes the context within the email is still valuable and a user wants to keep it in the issue's history.How would you like the feature to work - remove the character limit. Alternately, instead of having the body of the email auto-load into the Description, it could be auto-loaded into an Updates field if that doesn't have a character limit.Current Behaviour - an error message pops up if Description is >4000 characters, and the Issue cannot be loaded to Workfront.
DescriptionExisting batch (SFTP, S3 and others file processing) source connections allow data ingestion into AEP based on an individual file or at a folder level. In the Select Data step, currently there is no provision of providing a file name format specification that we want to process into AEP. When there are multiple differently named files in one folder in SFTP/S3 location and we want to ingest these files into different datasets, there need to be a way to select matching file name (for example file_1* to file_1 dataset and file_2* to file_2 dataset etc) from the same location in the UI. Why is this feature important to youAbility to select multiple files confirming a file name format will give us a flexibility to ingest multiple files from same location instead of creating separate locations for each file. How would you like the feature to workAlong with the current functionality, there should be a Text box to select the file name format allowing wild cards to select multiple files from the same location. Current BehaviorThe existing capability limits to ingest at an individual file or folder level in the UI from same location.
In Adobe reports you are able to run previous page and next page reports which is very handy. In Workspace you are able to see similar data using the flow analysis. An improvement on both of these, IMO, would be to have a 'Previous Page' and 'Next Page' dimensions that you could drag and drop on visualizations all within Analysis Workspace.
Description - I am currently trying to find some solutions to be able to set up certain user rights in much more detail than currently seems possible or intended.In the course of this, the way in which the inheritance of rights works hierarchically with shared objects constantly presents us with new challenges. Why is this feature important to you - We want to use portfolios as self-contained silos, so to speak. It would be necessary to be able to assign different rights within a portfolio in a convenient and understandable way. One problem with this is that if a user or a user group has already been given certain rights at a higher level, these are always inherited completely downwards via programs, portfolios, tasks, etc. and the inherited rights always override any additional, more restrictive rights.Inheritance cannot currently be deactivated via the API. Although there is an unofficial workaround that can also be implemented in Fusion, the complexity leads to quite complex and therefore error-prone Fusion scenarios. In addition, there are simply too many different places in the system where access rights are set (Sharing settings on objects, access levels, templates, ...). All of this means that a lot of trial and error with many errors is necessary in order to implement certain requirements or to recognise that something is not possible. I would like to give you an example to illustrate this. We would like to restrict a specific user group to be able to only download documents from a specific folder on a task and if accessing other folders to see the documents, but not being able to download those. If the user group has access to the parent project, the users have download access to all files due to inheritance, regardless of which folder they are in.Setting up an additional sharing right on a folder to restrict the download possibility for this group is ignored because of the inheritance from the parent projekt / task.So it would be necessary to turn of inheritance here. I would prefer it to be possible to overrule inherited rights. Looking into the Access Levels, there is a possible additional restriction to Never inherit document access from projects, tasks, requests, etc...Nice approach, but that means, that the access rights need to be set for any document. A rule on a folder is completely ignored for the containing documents. Apart from the fact that it took and still takes me a lot of time to find out and understand these peculiarities of the system, you may come across other challenges in other places.Maintenance and ensuring that users are really only allowed to do what they are supposed to do is also a very difficult task at the moment. How would you like the feature to work - more detailed and granular way to setup user rights to have a much more flexible application Current Behaviour - as described above.
Description - We are trying to provide a dev environment for users where they can develop the workflow templates and then once it is complete we can export. We will then import the working template into production environment for the user. Why is this feature important to you - Creating the templates directly in the production does not seem to the right action. The user will have to be given Administrator rights for the workflow template feature How would you like the feature to work - Export and Import feature for Workflow template in Proof HQ. Current Behavior - Currently what is expected is the user uses Preview Proof HQ to test his workflow template and then goes and recreates the whole template again in Prod Proof HQ which is not efficient
Description - We are trying to move away from the legacy S3 configuration to the newer option, where you can use an IAM role for Adobe to assume when delivering S3 files. This reduces the amount of maintenance from our end in supporting access keys/secret keys. However, it seems like when configuring export locations, those can only be seen by the creator. As a team with multiple users using the UI, it'd be nice for everyone to have access to the same info.Why is this feature important to you - It'd allow us to easily reconfigure our feeds via this methodHow would you like the feature to work - See everyone (or at least everyone within our group)'s export locations when configuring or changing feeds.Current Behaviour - This is only exposed at a user level
It would be helpful to have a checklist feature in Workfront Proof on which we could list each user or department's review responsibilities when reviewing a proof. For example, we typically have several users (from different departments) looking at the same proof, and each one is responsible for reviewing different areas or details. Having a checklist as a reminder of things to look for would be helpful. We have tried using the current pop-up message when a proof is opened or when a decision is made as a reminder notification. That, however, is not great because there was so much text for each department's review responsibilities, and it was only viewable before opening and before closing the proof, but could not be referenced simultaneously when reviewing the file. What we are looking for is a more integrated checklist that could be viewed while reviewing. If separate sections could be toggled or filtered that would be great (e.g. separate sections for each department, so only the one relevant to the user would be visible).
Is it possible to enable RTE for the comment? The business demand is having the ability to highlight the texts.
When a requestor fills out my form, they choose the Start date (which defaults to today's date). Then they choose the End date (which also defaults to today's date). Is there a way (maybe in Text Mode?) that we can make the second field (End date) defaulted to select the previously entered Start date value, since the End date should always come after the Start date?I'm always trying to reduce form clicks for my team. Requestors are noticing the behavior when entering numerous issues with the same form, specifically when using Start and End date fields in tasks and issues (also with default Calendar month at load-in). It takes extra time to select the End date, and is very obvious when flow is repeated numerous times. Maybe when a date field is added following after another date field, or, maybe when two date fields are set side-by-side (same line), then the second (End) date would allow the user to reference the first (Start) date. You could use the "Add Logic" menu and UI to reference the first form, with a function drop down with the option/value to "reference start date". That would be very cool. Right now, even if you select a Start date of Jan 1, 2035, the End date field will always default back to today's date, causing you to have to click a lot to get back to the year 2035, just to select the next day for the End date, resulting in double the amount of clicks for each issue created. Thanks!
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.
