Product Communities

Description - This feature request is related to interactive proofs where the URL of the proof requires authentication, and the proof is being viewed using the desktop proofing viewer    Current Behaviour - Currently if we authenticate into the most recent version of the proof, and we wish to refer to a previous version of the proof, it will force us to authenticate into the previous version as well. If I try to skip the authentication process on the most recent version of the proof (because I already know I want to look at a previous version), the authentication process will error out on me.   How would you like the feature to work - If both proof versions are going to the same URL, and I have already authenticated to view one, I want to be able to switch to a previous version and not have to authenticate again. This could be done if the proofing viewer would allow all versions to access the same cookie, or if desktop proofing viewer integrated with microsoft authentic

Description - Adding a page anchor to the Project's documents page so that when you upload a new version you do not lose your place on the page.Why is this feature important to you - There are projects that could have hundreds of documents. In those instances, it takes quite a bit of time for the document list to load when scrolling to find it. If the page could be anchored, this would save the user that time as they would not need to wait for the page to re-load the list of where they were at in the list. How would you like the feature to work - Add an anchor to the user's place on the page when a new document version is being uploaded via the Project Document's page.Current Behaviour - Currently, the page re-syncs (not necessarily completely refreshing) which brings you back up to the top of the documents list.  

In our small WF setup our 3 PMs are our system admins for 3 distinct departments working within the instance. Because of this they have access to all users on all task assignment drop-downs/ type aheads. Understanding that other lower access level PMs are restricted by their group, it would still be beneficial to limit the options that a user sees when assigning a task. Suggestion to limit using inherited project permissions so that WF only shows/ suggests those users who have permission to view the project in the first place. This will avoid unnecessary mistakes in assignments as our instance continues to grow. It would be great if this were an optional feature.

Description - I would love to see an option to search all of the posts/replies from some users that are very active and helpful in the experience league instead of having to manually try to find helpful posts from them through their profile. For instance, if I could search for specific keywords or just "text mode" to see what examples they have provided in the past would be awesome.  Adding a subscription every time they post or reply might also be helpful to stay up on their latest feedback.  Why is this feature important to you - To find relevant answers from the experts quickly since the forum search doesn't always find me what I want. I like bookmarking user profiles when I see someone provides excellent examples and guidance.  How would you like the feature to work - Add a search bar to user profiles. Add a subscribe option to users.  Current Behaviour - I didn't see any easy way to do either thing, but please let me know if I am just m

Please get rid of that user information box that pops up whenever the cursor/mouse comes near a username. It constantly pops up when NOT needed, and takes multiple clicks to get rid of. Once or twice is annoying, multiple times a day and I'm ready to suggest getting rid of Workfront.At the very least, please provide a way to turn this feature annoyance off.

I am disappointed in the Project Subscribe. Please give us the ability to Subscribe to a project and receive notification when any task or issue is added, changed, deleted or commented on.

Description - ability to create custom fields/forms that we could attach to hour types in WF.Why is this feature important to you - would allow for improved grouping and reporting for charts and graphs.How would you like the feature to work - TBDCurrent Behaviour - Not able to lump hour types together in current setup.

Description - Would like for a user to be able to enter the start and end dates and the duration auto populate. Why is this feature important to you - A lot of time with project planning you are more likely to be given set start and end dates for tasks and the current functionality requires user to do additional math to calculate how many days a tasks will take and some span months at a time. How would you like the feature to work - A user enters a task start date of 10/2 and end date of 10/6 and the duration will automatically fill in as '5 days'Current Behavior - The current behavior is to enter start date of 10/2 and 5 days duration but this can be difficult to judge when you have tasks that take place over a large amount of days. If i want a task to end on 11/2, I have to calculate exactly how many days are in October and November to get the correct end date. 

TLDR: It would be great if we could more easily adjust the planned hours across a multi-day task similar to SchedulerOur team currently uses Scheduler for daily meetings and planning new work requests. We understand our resource availability based on the Scheduler Planned Hours and since our average project durations are 2-10 days our task durations are usually .25-2 days at 2 hours or less. So large amounts of short sprint tasks. When projects need to be re-prioritized or adjusted to account for new or more critical work the Project Managers need to "balance the hours" by editing the planned hour allocations across our task durations, or just moving the task out. The latter is preferred as it honors due date commitments.Now that we are preparing to move to Balancer, having the edit allocations buried by even more clicks creates additional touch points and frustration on our PM team. It would be great if we could more easily adjust the planned hours across a multi-day task si

Description: As a business (finance sector) we need be able to  report on which  Alerts have fired in a set period,  so we can monitor usage and response to  the alert. Adobe support have confirmed this  feature is not availableWhy is this feature important to you – In order to meet our regulatory commitments, we have setup Alerts for a large number of high  priority  journeys customers can undertake cross our digital platforms. The alerts are used, in the main, to monitoring variation  in  journey  start  and completion  rates . Once the threshold(s) is  breached, based on  the alert  rules ,  an E-mail alert is sent.  The relevant party  should then  response to  the Alert and investigate to  issue. However we have no  reporting on  any  aspect of the alerts. This  means we cannot prove our ‘Control’  is working , effective and being responded to.How would

Hello, We have a couple of Fusion that use 'Expenses' object in Fusion to trigger some actions when an expense has been added to a task/project for example. But we do not have the same for Billing Records. To bypass this we need to use the 'api-unsupported' which is more difficult to handle. Is there a way to integrate this ? Thanks.

Description - If an user is out of office, when messaging that user in a project, an out of office pop up will be triggered.Why is this feature important to you - This will ensure that projects are being adequately covered and business can continue as usual in that user's absence. How would you like the feature to work - A user will input their time off into their personal Time Off calendar within Workfront. During those calendar days that were selected, when another user is messaging that user/ in a project or task assigned to the out of office user, an out of office popup will appear next to their name or somewhere visible on the screen.Current Behaviour - Currently there is no feature to indicate when a user is out of office.

Currently, when sending a report, you send a customized message and an attachment.It would be more useful for my team to have the reports embedded into the body of the email - allowing for data to be consumed and understood faster with fewer needs to click or download anything.  

Description - You have all the other actions, just add Export to PDF Why is this feature important to you? - It adds more time for me to wait and actually OPEN the report so I can actually get to the menu to actually Export it as a PDF.  Why  How would you like the feature to work? - Just add this to the available line items in the "More Actions" menu, like you have here: Current Behavior - Again, currently I have to open the report, click SHARE, export file, and then select PDF.  It would just be so much easier to do the same from the screen above instead of being forced to go all the way into the report.  I can't imagine many of us would need to export it on a regular basis in CSV form, so why would you offer that as a shortcut from the "More Actions" menu?  The feature most of us would need more often is to export it a PDF.   Better yet, just change it to EXPORT FILE, and use the same dialogue you currently supply on the Share menu from the Workspace

Make a clickable email link appear on a custom form as part of logic-displaying text.

We would like to be able to change or delete the owner of a board. This feature is especially important be cause of the joiner/changer/leaver process. Once a person leaves a team or the company a board needs to be reassigned. Currently the board owner cannot be removed or changed. Thus, this person will remain to have access to the board (if not deactivated or deleted), or even when deactivated show up as the owner of a board. The workaround would be to move all cards individually to a new/different board, as there is no bulk move feature, yet.

Hi all, in our company, we have more than 2000 components, such as segments & metrics, which are used for various reports.It happens - maybe once a year - that we need to make adjustments to individual components. This will sometimes lead to problems, when the owner of such a component is not available, because if we have to make such adjustments, it usually has to be done on short notice.The issue here is, that the ownership (or editor right) for a component cannot be shared with different business users.You can share a component with other users, but those users will not have the right to edit the shared component. Yet, in our normal business setup, we have teams of multiple colleagues, who manage various sets of these components together.So it would be great for these teams, if you could share edit rights with other people, or at least assign general editor rights to a central user group.This is needed so that the colleagues can support each other, in case so

With GDPR coming, the need for consent awareness of rules and actions is becoming more stringent.We have quite a lot of rules which stack up depending on a consent level of the user (e.g.):- strict -> only complete anonymous tracking allowed (eg. analytics beacon)- mid -> some user identification allowed (hashed)- low -> 3rd party pixels allowedCurrently we have to make for each of these levels a rule, take e.g. a simple page view:- level at least strict -> send out the analytics beacon- level at least mid -> send data to DMP- level at least low -> set a DoubleClick display PixelWhich ends up for quite a lot of our rules, we have to double or triple them...Some idea could be to have e.g. a consent check action in the action chain. If the check fails, the rest of the action chain is not executed anymore. This could combine the 3 rules above into 1 page view rule with this action chain:Actions: set AA vars -> send AA beacon -> clear AA vars -> check consent mid

The designers always have to go through the same process every time they upload a proof and were hoping there was a way to automate this to save time. When creating and sharing a proof they have to make a lot of selections that should just be automatic (proof is always automated, the Workflow template is always the Brand Designer Proof, we always want multiple documents combined, that combination should be automatically named with the project code, etc).

Description - Currently a To Do task appears under the Project Name of "User Name's Tasks". The problem is that any reports asking for Task Assignment by name will also include non project related To Do tasks.   Why is this feature important to you - Having To Do tasks present provides an unrealistic picture of the total project tasks a person is assigned to.How would you like the feature to work - Change the project name from user name's Tasks to User Name To Do Tasks. This will allow suppression of To Do tasks with the filter of Project Name does not contain To Do. The current workaround requires Project Name does not contain 's Tasks. This apostrophe s is not a best practice. Current Behaviour - If a report asks for assigned to by Name, it will include To Do Tasks.  

Please correct sentence to: "You replied to _____"

Description - In the templates creator, with the Gant chart screen, allow the ability to drag and move dependencies and constraints in the chart.Why is this feature important to you - Visual is easier than drop down menus and "choices" of Start no later than... Latest Available Time...Fixed Time... etcHow would you like the feature to work - Use right clicks to bring up a menu to add different arrows to indicate constraints. Drag and drop Task "icons" along chart to indicate start and stop days/hours.  

Apologies in advance for submitting this as a new idea as there may already be an idea similar to this one: https://one.workfront.com/s/idea/0870z000000PSGvAAO. My goal is to expand on what's been proposed and suggest a UI element that could to introduced to control how this feature works.Currently, when a project is pending approval, it is locked so no updates can be made: tasks or items cannot be added, new comments cannot be made by users via the Updates area, custom data cannot be updated, etc. Although this generally makes sense from a compliance perspective (as a way to prevent users from "sneaking in" changes), there's a case to be made that certain folks should still be able to post certain updates and edit certain project data without having to restart the entire approval process. It's tempting to say that one should just "kick" the project record out from the approval process by adjusting the status, make the edits, and re-initiate approvals, however, it certain instances it'

We would like the capability to expand the column width for the Project name in scenario planner.  This would help to identify which project have been imported into a scenario and which ones have not.  Currently the column is locked and there is no hover functionality on the name.  The only way to understand the full name is to click into the project itself.

Description -Why is this feature important to you - 1. Would directly help our team members working on copied requests identify queue path. 2. Would directly impact queue, queue topic, request reporting.How would you like the feature to work - When a user copies an existing request the request path should populate with the original request path details.  Current Behaviour - Currently copied requests display "N/A" in the Request Path.