Product Communities

Description - Would like the ability to target different on load messages in Proof and be able to attach them to specific automated workflows.Why is this feature important to you - We would love to be able to have this feature enabled for some users and not all users when viewing a proof. For example, we have external users that need the message and the internal company users do not need the message. Since we are unable to target a specific workflow, all users unfortunately have to see and click to remove this message, which adds another step for the end user and they have found this to be an annoyance since we turned this on recently. Lastly, we have a few different businesses in our instance and it would allow flexibility for different units to control their own messaging.How would you like the feature to work - Be able to create personalized on load messages that you are then able to target to specific proof automated workflows.Current Behavior - Currently you are able to turn on th

Description - We would like the ability to limit commenting to only those tied to the Proof workflow.  Currently you can add ANY proof user to a comment. Why is this feature important to you - As a marketing agency, we work with competitor clients and some users work across clients.  We need the ability to protect proprietary information and protect from inadvertently emailing someone with a similar name at the wrong client.  Our art directors work with many groups and the external emails are only used in Proof.  External clients do have not access to our platform.  So changes to user access would not be an option for us. Also, the Share setting within Proof itself isn't feasible because Partner accounts only seems to work with organizations that also have WF Proof.  How would you like the feature to work - It would be good to have an option within the proof workflow details that restricted users from tagging anyone but the people who are me

I needed to update the calculation on a custom form, but instead of just adding the new code in I have receive an error code stating " Form Number field is used in a multi-form configuration, if you would like to change this formula you will need to remove this field and replace it with a new one containing the desired calculation". Form Number is the custom field I wanted to update, but now I have to create a whole new field, add the modified formula, remove this field from every form it's on, and add the new field back where the old was replaced... but b/c I don't want the name of the field to change I have to do this a second time with the correct name. This is a huge undertaking when every other field updates immediately when an update occurs, not sure why this can't update as well. Even selecting the option of Update Calculation is useless.

I am a power user/resource hog in Fusion. I perform 10s of thousands of operations and frequently need to move around 100s of MBs if files. As such, I run out of your paltry 1GB of memory frequently. I am informed by Support that there is no way to monitor the current memory usage while running a Fusion scenario. And the official answer is "just do less". I argue this is a PRIME case for providing us access to poll the current used memory from within a running scenario. Similar to an Environment variable. This way I would not have to run hard until I hit a brick wall, I could periodically poll the current memory usage and decide if I need to gracefully stop or if I am able to continue on. I am surprised that this doesn't already exist, as it is rather asinine that I can "do anything" in Fusion, but run it hard until it breaks in a non-graceful way. Thank you,Wes-(Very large, multi-milion dollar client)

Can you please add the ability to rearrange the fields on the layout when viewing custom object records?The fields are perhaps arranged according to the order in which they were created, but there are logical groupings that we want to create to make it easier when viewing the records. As it stands, we have date fields that are all over the place, in an order that is not helpful. 

We would like to be able to report on total Planned Hours by Role by Project. Currently if more than one role is assigned to a task in a project, we can't report on the planned hours for each role on the task.  Reporting on this will allow us to better estimate effort hours by role for new projects from prior projects. We cannot use Actual hours as we don't carry worker licenses for all of our users so being able to use Planned Hours would get us closer.   Also, since we are not able to break out Planned Hours for tasks by role, we are also not be able to compare planned hours to actual hours, which is something we are hoping to do as well for those who do have a worker license.   

Description - Currently the three options for individual user proof permission profiles are supervisor (listed 1st), manager (listed 2nd) and administrator (listed 3rd).  Why is this feature important to you - Our team uses proofs actively on all projects.  Each user needs the right access to proof/edit/approve, etc.How would you like the feature to work - I have a few options.  1 -  Switch the word manager to reviewer so someone knows that's the lowest level permission.  2 -Put the options in access order = manager, supervisor, admin.  Option 3 - Add a question mark icon to define these three levels when someone hovers over it.Current Behaviour - I had my designers using the manager setting and there were numerous access issues.  I didn't realize it was the lowest level permission.

Description - Use an LLM and finetune it with WF(and the other products) documentation and the content stored in the Community forums. Then put it either in the search or in the side bar as an assistant.Why is this feature important to you - It would be a great way to make finding answers more efficient.How would you like the feature to work - Expained above in Description.Current Behavior - THere is currently no AI so searching is the only choice.

Can you believe both AEM Sites or AEM Assets do not have Trashcan feature where you can easily undelete/restore deleted files?As a robust product like AEM, this is absolutely inexcusable to not have such feature built in.. Even Wordpress has "Trash" feature..Please, I beg you, product team, consider adding this feature.Philip

Customer Journey Analytics recently got a new visualization called "Journey Canvas", which lets us define user journey through dragging and dropping elements onto a canvas. It nicely fits between the exploratory Flow viz and the more rigid Fallout viz and is great to visualize, well, journeys: However, if we right-click any node and choose the "Create Segment Filter from node" option, we see that there is no magic smoke inside of this new visualization. This impressive viz falls in the category which I like to call "Segment Builders", as all that it's doing is creating complex sequential Segments Filters on the fly, then display the result in a nice way. It's practically just a couple Freeform tables in a trench coat: This doesn't make the Journey Canvas viz any less impressive but clearly highlights one important detail: There is no technical reason why this shouldn't be in Adobe Analytics. We have built Segments like the one on the screenshot above for years in AA, especially with

Description - When copying an activity to a different workspace, list workspaces alphabetically Why is this feature important to you - we often copy activities to other workspaces and it's frustrating having to hunt through an unordered list of 20+ workspaces to find the correct one How would you like the feature to work - When copying an activity to a different workspace, list workspaces alphabetically Current Behaviour - When copying an activity to a different workspace, the workspaces listed are unordered, or not ordered in any logical way

Description - For users on organic search (i.e. Google) and land on a result such as 'Morgan Stanley PDF' this link takes them directly to the PDF instead of going to the Morgan Stanley website first. This means we are losing millions of visitor analytics data.Why is this feature important to you - The current workaround of embed API is a timely workaround we are exploring. It is important to have this feature as a toggle option within Adobe Data Collection similar to 'download links'. It is important because we have many users going through this flow for many PDFs and it's over 1 million hits we are missing attribution. Given they are both Adobe products, we expected a seamless integration with analytics.How would you like the feature to work - By default Adobe Analytics captures analytics from users that click on MS PDF that links directly to PDF from google search. This can be toggled on in similar way to  'download links' check box in Adobe Launch.Current Behaviour - Currently

Every event, condition and exception wich is saved in a rule is saved with a name. It would be a time saver, if it is possible to reuse saved events, conditions and exceptions in other new/existing rules.

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary: AEM as Cloud service CDN (BYOCDN) logs should also include X-Forwarded-Host header value.  Use-case: AEM as Cloud service CDN (BYOCDN) logs should also include X-Forwarded-Host header value. This header is crucial in determining the request host in a multi-tenant environment. Current/Experienced Behavior: AEM as Cloud service CDN (BYOCDN) logs do not include X-Forwarded-Host header value. Improved/Expected Behavior: AEM as Cloud service CDN (BYOCDN) logs should include X-Forwarded-Host header value. Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable): Sample logs (Current):  {"timestamp":"<timestamp>","ttfb":85,"cli_ip":"<cli_ip>","cli_country":"<cli_country>","rid":"<rid>","req_ua":"<req_ua>","aem_program_id":"<programID>","aem_env_id":"<environmentID>","aem_tier":"<aem_tier>","aem_env_type":"<aem_env_type>","hos

Hi Team,as requested by customers, it would be great if there is a way to export all rules and elements for the purpose of maintaining the data dictionary and documentation.

As a developer who builds tight integrations with Marketo, I am interested in being able to send users back to Marketo where appropriate reviews can be done for things like Lead records, Smart Lists, various Assets, etc.For example, if I am showing records to a Marketo customer that may need to be reviewed (such as having a bad email address), I'd like to provide the exact record in Marketo's UI for cross-referencing. However, to create a URL around a Lead record's details, the structure needs to be like the following: app-aba.marketo.com/leadDatabase/loadLeadDetail?leadId=123 Without an Idea like Provide API method to determine instance datacenter , there is no way to provide a correct URL to end users. There is no valid way to create a redirect that would allow a developer to send people back to Marketo without knowing the exact datacenter and pod. Today, Salesforce works around this potential issue by using login.salesforce.com as a valid wildcard

Description - Within the comment section, have a dropdown of premade comments (Ie: Done reviewing, Done w/ comments, Done w/o comments, etc) that users can click on instead of having to type out certain messages.Why is this feature important to you - For a handful of our user base, they leave the same type of comments when they're reviewing work. This would help reduce the amount of clicks by having some type of dropdown list of comments to choose from instead of having to type it all out.How would you like the feature to work - Be added as an additional field type where a sys. admin can type in the comments and it will show as a drop down option to the user. Current Behaviour - Not available/ users have to fully type out their comments

I've found the Workfront Cookbooks to be extremely helpful in optimizing our Workfront experience. Something that I've continued to struggle with as a small implementation team is best practices for training. Could you develop a Workfront Training/Implementation Cookbook for new users? 

Description - When creating a new webhook, it's very difficult to search for a custom field within a filter. We have a lot of custom fields and having a simple dropdown which is lengthy is not ideal in 2025. A searchable dropdown as for example this one (https://www.w3schools.com/howto/howto_js_filter_dropdown.asp) would be extremely helpful. This would primarily be for a webhook, but the same approach would be for other Workfront modules where currently CMD+F "does the trick".Why is this feature important to you - I spend ages in trying to find a custom field in a webhook dropdown.How would you like the feature to work - Just add a searchable dropdown instead of a regular HTML dropdown.

Would like the ability to build into a template a specific task notification. So if task 42 is marked complete it would send a notification to either a certain user or group or ideally an outside email address (executive notification). We have people who only want to know when one specific task is complete.

Description - During a CSV import, there should be an option to either append the data to the existing dataset or overwrite it.Why is this feature important to you - This option is important because it prevents data loss and ensures proper data management. Without a clear choice between appending and overwriting, users might accidentally overwrite valuable existing data or create duplicate entries.How would you like the feature to work - When manually uploading a file with data for an audience, one of the steps should include an option to choose whether to append or overwrite the data.Current Behaviour - Currently, when manually uploading data, it's unclear whether the data is being appended or overwritten.

If you go the Filters or Calculated metrics managerhttps://experience.adobe.com/#/@intelcorp/platform/analytics/#/components/filters/managerhttps://experience.adobe.com/#/@intelcorp/platform/analytics/#/components/calculatedMetrics/managerThe "used in" function was release in 2024 but is only available for Adminshttps://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/analytics-platform/using/releases/2024#sep24  It works great and I used it to clean up my unused assets but I can't do that for users. Please  make this function available to all users.

Description - We need to determine where a micro-audience is being used, such as whether it is part of a larger audience or journey.Why is this feature important to you - Audience cleanups will be easier since we’ll know which micro-audience belongs to which audience, preventing accidental deletions.How would you like the feature to work - In the selected audience window, in the Summary display whether it is part of other audiences.Current Behaviour - Currently, there is no straightforward way to determine if an audience is part of another one.

Description - Making A4T compatible with the Cross Device Report Suite (not currently using CJA)Why is this feature important to you? Understanding how cross-device behavior influences the results of our digital experiments.  We have a very integrated customer journey across Mobile Apps, Desktop Web, and Mobile Web.  It would be beneficial to understand conversions across devices to tie back to whichever Recipe of the test they are allocated to.How would you like the feature to work - Simlar to the way Analysis Workspace + A4T works todayCurrent Behaviour - Known limitation -- "CDA is not currently compatible with A4T"https://experienceleague.adobe.com/en/docs/analytics/components/cda/overview 

Description - While having permissions per object is great for granular security, it is not so great for providing access. It requires manually sharing multiple objects to give the same set of people permission. This is especially true for dashboards, where users must have permission to the dashboard itself, the reports on the dashboard, and the projects and tasks on the reports. Having a Team or Group to organize the users is not the issue. It's making sure all of the elements on the dashboard is shared with the same Team/Group. It would be very helpful to add an option in sharing of dashboards and reports to cascade the sharing at the higher level down to the lower levels, assuming the sharer has that permission on the lower objects. Obviously it should not be too easy to accidentally expand the sharing, but it shouldn't be too hard either. Why is this feature important to you - For ease of use of dashboards and reports, having a way to provide dependent access removes the