Product Communities

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: Link Reference Update inside experience fragment when creating a live copy or rollout an experience fragment Use-case: When we rollout or create a site/live copy of a page the link reference gets updated from language master/language to respective country/language inside components with in that page. But in experience fragment this feature is missing Current/Experienced Behavior: Link Reference does not get update inside experience fragment when creating a live copy or rollout an experience fragment Improved/Expected Behavior: Link Reference Update inside experience fragment when creating a live copy or rollout an experience fragment Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable):   Customer-name/Organization name:   Screenshot (if applicable):   Code package (if applicable):  

It would be useful to be able to delegate work to multiple people. I am in an agency environment and one person may support multiple accounts (portfolios in our instance). When they are out it would be ideal for them to be able to say delegate tasks in this portfolio to person 1 and in this portfolio to person 2. 

Description - Make the task description and project description fields formatted text field types instead of paragraph field types so that we can link, bullet, bold, and use italics. Why is this feature important to you - I always add links to reference documents in task and project descriptions and the full URLs make the field really long and hard to read.How would you like the feature to work - Change the field type from plain text field to formatted text/enable rich text formattingCurrent Behavior - can't format text in task or project description at all. 

With the Next Gen update to Images and Files Details, users can now edit an image in Design Studio. Saved edits to the image will be reflected wherever the image is currently used, including any live assets. Similar to Edit Form and Edit Landing Page permissions, it would make sense to have an "Edit Image" permission added to Role Permissions so admins could lock down this capability to certain roles.

Description - Once a request is converted to a project and assigned, it would be helpful if there was an option to "lock" the original request.    Why is this feature important to you - Often, those who request projects add updates or documents to the original request versus the project and forget to @ whoever they are trying to communicate with, and those comments or documents are missed.    How would you like the feature to work - Once converted, the request is locked (automatically would be preferred) but could also include an option for System Admins or Project Managers to unlock or make a change if necessary.    Current Behaviour - I have found a workaround for this within the dashboard (removing the link to the request) but it is much too easy for requesters to click on "Requests" and then click the original request, which then leads to the original issue. 

Description - After a thorough implementation, we decided to use the Request Queues built directly in the projects. The functionality is great. We have a project template set up with Queue Topics, Groups, Forms etc. The issue is that when creating requests directly in a project there is no Autosave or Drafting functionality that we know of. Our users are becoming increasingly agitated by having complex requests easily deleted at the unfortunate click out of the request window or accidental refresh of the page.   Why is this feature SO VERY important to you - Our current solution is to submit requests without auto-routing to a traffic team so the work can be saved. Leading to needing to save as you go, something that is antiquated in this day and age, especially knowing that autosave exists in many other places in Workfront, including the Global Request Queues area.   How would you like the feature to work - simply autosave as you go with a Drafts section built into the Reque

Description - A user should be able to set the the default number of hours that a request will take IN ADDITION to the Default Duration that can be set. Currently, if hours are used to describe the Default Duration, the Request will have a start and end date/time based on those hours. However, Requests should be defined by both the Planned Hours set (e.g. 2-3 hours of working time) as well as the total Duration of the Request (e.g. 3 days). If a user chooses 3 days as the Default Duration, the system assumes that the assignee will allocate 24 hours of working time to complete the Request. If a user chooses 2 hours as the Default Duration, the system assumes that the assignee will be done with the Request in 2 hours time. The system should account for both forms of timing.   Why is this feature important to you - As Requests are made, the incorrect Planned Hours based on 3 days of duration are assigned to the working team member. These hours, while not accurate, often spike th

Description When searching for projects by name, a bunch of criteria comes up.  I'd like to also filter that criteria by most recently edited date.  I don't believe this is possible today.    Why is this feature important to youI have so many projects, this helps to find projects more quickly.   How would you like the feature to workOnce there's data in the name field, I could click on the 'last modified' filter at any time.    Current Behaviour - Only one filter can happen at a time and they cannot be mixed together.

Description -Our team relies on commit dates to plan out and communicate our workload every morning to our lead. This helps us know if we are able to take on more work or if we need to push out work. Having easy access to it is very efficient. The process we had in the updates tab was a simple dropdown 1 step process that was separate from the completion date which made it easy to identify it and update it. 

Description: Finance Recalculations on a project do not trigger a system update or appear in the Updates tab, Audit Logs, or the Adobe Admin Console Audit Log. Per a recent Workfront Support request, I was informed that this action is considered a background process and is not currently tracked in the standard system or audit logs, and there’s no built-in setting to enable logging. Why is this feature important to you -Tracking of hours and actual cost is integral within Workfront for reporting, and is often a cross-departmental mandatory required reporting functionality, sometimes in terms of governance. It should considered as best practice, when finances are recalculated within a project, that there is a system automated date/timestamp and audit log tracking created for this.   How would you like the feature to work -Preferably there would be an automated update of a successful (or unsuccessful) recalculation attempt, which should show which object unique ID the

Currently when you unassign a user from a task/issue, it automatically fills in the assignee with that user's job role. My company has never used this feature and it just creates extra work and confusion to either remove that job role or to see it in the assignments. It would be great if this is something we could disable in the setup area.

AMP brings modern interactivity to emails and could really help marketers make their email experiences exceptional. In addition to HTML and plain text, Marketo should also begin supporting text-x-amphtml, the MIME Type for AMP for email. Email clients like Gmail and Outlook.com already support it, and it's rolling out to others too. Bonus points if Marketo could integrate with Litmus or get 250ok to support AMP email version previews for testing/QA.Here's more info on the subject: Gmail rolls out AMP for Email - Litmus 

Description - latest change to Project Edit screen removed the last vestige of posting comments by removing the ability to post comments to multiple Projects at once when bulk editing selected Projects. Why is this feature important to you - there is no longer a simple way to put information/comments/updates on multiple relevant jobs creating multi-step process X each applicable project (could be 3, 10, 50, more).  How would you like the feature to work - options (may be others) 1) at minimum, return to the way it very recently was where if you were bulk editing a project one could select the Comment box in the left pane to post a comment to multiple projects at once (cannot do this with single Project Edit for some time);  2) allowing us to Open Summary on Projects in bulk and add a comment;  3) at the very minimum provide Project-level Open Summary panel that includes Updates section as in other parts of the system -- this one doesn't remo

Description - I am trying to understand how we can use the connections we build in Workfront planning in our reports. If we build a connection between a record in WF Planning to a project in WF Core, I wonder what is the best way to show connected metadata (Record/Record type/Workspace) from planning into project reports that include those connected projects. Why is this feature important to you - This will help immensely in making the connections we build in WF planning visible in our WF Core reports. How would you like the feature to work - Ideally the planning connection fields we create on any custom forms should be available in that object as a reportable field (similar to a custom field) Current Behaviour -  Planning connection fields are not visible in Workfront reports.

Description -Currently, Workfront's Audit Logs primarily track actions performed by individual users. While recent enhancements (specifically the "Other enhancements during the Second Quarter 2025 release timeframe" regarding Represent Adobe Admin Console user changes as "System" in the Workfront update feed) have introduced "System" activity updates in user update feeds, and these actions captured in the comprehensive System “Audit Log,” however, it’s no longer possible to filter for these log types and action performed by “System” listed under the User Name column.Why is this feature important to you -This highlights a critical visibility gap regarding automated or system-driven changes within Workfront. For example, changes originating from integrations, API calls, automated workflows, or even internal Workfront system updates are not readily auditable through the Setup > System > “Audit Log” page.Improved Transparency and Accountability: Gain a comprehensive un

Would love to have the ability to change the routing/"Path" (located in Issue Details tab / Overview Sub-tab) of a submitted request? It happens when the Requestor incorrectly selects it from the get-go so it does not appear in the correct team(s) queue. Since the Queue Topic can be edited, it would be nice if it would automatically change the Path associated or simply have the ability to change it manually. Thanks in advance!

We have an increasing number of social animations. Workfront have flagged we’re unable to collate animations on Proof HQ it means the client gets numerous links and they’ve now voiced it’s too much to manage. As a result, it means copying and pasting every link into one consolidated email for them to review animations – It’s extremely time consuming and they then approve on email rather than on Proof HQ.   It also means if the same amend is needed across 10 videos that the client needs to go in and add that individually to each rather than applying one comment which gets applied to all.The client sees the statics in one proof and can't understand why this can't be the same for MP4s.Developing the ability to proof multiple MP4s would save valuable time, reduce human error of say forgetting to approve 1 out of 20 links and make ProofHQ more desirable for future and existing clients- instead we are at risk of being able to implement the process as this is so much of a high level issu

Dark mode is necessary for a lot of teams. I have Workfront opened all day, and the white backgrounds gives me migraines. Please add dark mode to this otherwise perfect system! 

Description - Proof Deadline Date should not be blanked out on the most recently activated stage when the "Workfront stage" is added to the WorkflowWhy is this feature important to you - Reviewers are not seeing these proofs appear on their report and are missing proof deadlines.How would you like the feature to work - When a "Workfront stage" is added, it should not change/blank out a Proof Deadline Date in the recently activated stage.  The Proof Deadline Date should retain.Current Behaviour -Proof Deadline Date is blanked out on the most recently activated stage when the "Workfront stage" is added to the Workflow This is related to:a ticket we have opened with Adobe Support:  00415119 [WORKFLOW-2900] Issue: Sync with Compliance Catalog is Blanking out Proof Deadline Date - Jira (atlassian.net)

DescriptionAs a user of Workfront, I want the ability to schedule my work on a calendar widget on the home screen so that I can time block efficiently. Why is this feature important to youtime blocking is an important part of my work process and the inability to mirror or complete that in Workfront is limiting.How would you like the feature to workUtilize the durations/planned dates for tasks/issues assigned to me and prompt them to show on a calendar view that connects with outlook to book time around existing meetings. Reference https://www.usemotion.com/ as general interface of widget... another ai connection for us too!Current Behaviorcalendar was removed from the New Home screen

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: There should be a UI accessible to authors that will allow them to manage dictionaries Use-case: Translation management Current/Experienced Behavior: The current UI is not accessible to authors (and probably not available in Cloud) which means, updating this will require authors to be dependent on admins or developers to make changes https://<hostname>:<port-number>/libs/cq/i18n/translator.html Improved/Expected Behavior: A UI within the Authoring console is available AEnvironment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): AEMaCS Customer-name/Organization name: Proquire Screenshot (if applicable): N/A Code package (if applicable): N/A

Currently, the project's Planned Completion Date is auto-calculated by the planned completion date of the latest task. We'd like the project's planned start date to have the same sort of functionality. We are using cross-project predecessors more and more but when things are pushed, the project's start date doesn't move in the Portfolio's Gantt Chart.

I would like to be able to use the Portfolio Optimizer to prioritize new requests that have not been converted to a project yet. If we have 20 new ideas (requests) submitted for review, it would be great if we could have WF prioritize them like we do for projects.

Description - The email notification to go to a proof could use improvement.  The CTA to go to proof is too small and we have had several users click the Proof Link because it is more prominent.Why is this feature important to you - When users do not use the CTA, they are making comments on the proof, not in the proof.  This can be done through this email and also by clicking the Open Summary icon on the proof in the document section.  In some instances, the url can provide instructions to add an account, resulting in the comments ending up in the native file (Figma, Word)How would you like the feature to work -  The CTA to go to the proof should be more prominent and remove the proof link from the email notification.  If it's being shared out, we want the proof shared, not the link.  This will mitigate opportunities for Reviewers to make comments outside the proof. Current Behavior -Proof comments can be added through the document section/Open Summar

We would like the ability to customize the terminology of the project status label, within the Layout Template settings (Terminology tab).Example: a team in our organization would like to use the term 'Phase' instead of Status on projects. On tasks, we would keep the term 'Status', so it would need to be an object-specific terminology customization.