About Courtney_Grimes

Courtney_Grimes

While standard Marketo fields are already blocked from having API names that start with numbers in the UI, this restriction is not in place for Marketo Custom Objects. This causes knock-on issues with Velocity scripting being unable to reference the field. The ability to create fields starting with numbers should be blocked from the UI.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎06-05-2020

Updating this idea to note that Person Time Zone is now exposed as a field you can use. Thank you for implementing it.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎05-27-2020

When using the / rest / asset / v1 / files . json endpoint, being able to use MIME type as a querying parameter would be useful, especially when dealing with Design Studio instances where foldering has not been properly used. Being able to pull all PDFs with application/pdf or PNGs with image/png would be helpful for paring down results to just certain types of files. The MIME type today is already returned when using this endpoint.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎05-27-2020

Right now, there is no accurate way to determine if a file is identical, but uploaded with a different name inside a Marketo instance. While you can pull file size and try to 1:1 compare sizes to understand if a file is identical, this is an imprecise method. By storing some sort of checksum hash (MD5, SHA-2, etc.) with an asset, there's now several options for handling duplicate files. Uploads via API or UI could use the checksum to prevent duplicate uploads, and exposing the checksum via API (or even UI in some way) would allow for faster and more accurate detection of existing duplicate files.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎04-30-2020

You're in luck--the User Management API was recently released. That said, there's not a plug-and-play integration with Okta yet, but you can at least put something together manually.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎04-16-2020

Without seeing the full email template, this is going to be hard to diagnose, but I wanted to at least offer a bit of guidance. Some things you can look at to help deduce what might be the problem include: Do extensive tag closure checks. The most common reason a module will fail is that it isn't properly closed in some way with a stray missing </td> tag or what have you. You can use an HTML linter for this, but a site like HTML Tidy Online or Closing Tag Checker can work in a pinch. Ensure your module setup works with your container setup. Every module must be within your .mktoContainer parent and all of your module children must be at the same hierarchy level—so if your container is a <table>, the modules all must be immediate <td> children; if your container is a <td>, they all should be <table> children, and so on. Try pulling your modules one-by-one from your code to see where there may be issues, then re-introduce them once they've been known to work.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎04-10-2020

Hi Sev, Strictly speaking, Twitter should be able to read og:image tags—it's the fallback that it uses if Twitter's own twitter:image isn't being used. However, you do need to at least define twitter:card (as either summary or summary_large_image) and twitter:title. If you have those already set up, what may have happened in this case is a caching issue; are you testing using https://cards-dev.twitter.com/validator? You can also try defining twitter:image and see if that changes anything in terms of what you see when testing against the validator.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎04-02-2020

So, there's actually several things to unpack here because your code actually does center forms by default: the form itself is what's having issues. You'll first see that there's an imbalance here because label widths have been defined, but they don't show anything, causing a skew. However, even when we fix that, the form is still skewed because the length of the fields have been defined compared to the width of the form: You'll want to use the following CSS to correct this: label.mktoLabel.mktoHasWidth, .mktoOffset, .mktoForm .mktoGutter { display: none; } .mktoForm, .mktoForm .mktoFieldWrap, .mktoForm .mktoHtmlText, .mktoForm input, .mktoLogicalField .mktoCheckboxList {width:100% !important;} @media only screen and (min-width:480px) { .mktoFormCol:first-child:nth-last-child(2), .mktoFormCol:first-child:nth-last-child(2) ~ .mktoFormCol {width: 100% !important;} .mktoFormCol:first-child:nth-last-child(3), .mktoFormCol:first-child:nth-last-child(3) ~ .mktoFormCol {width: 50% !important;} .mktoFormCol:first-child:nth-last-child(4), .mktoFormCol:first-child:nth-last-child(4) ~ .mktoFormCol {width: 33.3333% !important;} .mktoFormCol:first-child:nth-last-child(3) ~ .mktoFormCol {padding-left: 0.3em !important;} } @media only screen and (max-width:480px) {.mktoFormCol {width:100% !important;}} .mktoAsterix{display:none !important;} .mktoForm .mktoGutter {display:none !important;} .mktoButtonWrap {margin-left:0 !important;} .mktoButtonRow {float: right;} .mktoForm input[type=text], .mktoForm input[type=url], .mktoForm input[type=email], .mktoForm input[type=tel], .mktoForm input[type=number], .mktoForm input[type=date], .mktoForm textarea.mktoField, .mktoForm select.mktoField {padding: 0.3em; width: 100% !important;} .mktoForm {clear: both; margin-bottom: 0.3em;} .mktoForm .mktoRadioList, .mktoForm .mktoCheckboxList {float: left !important; width: auto !important;} .mktoForm .mktoRadioList > label, .mktoForm .mktoCheckboxList > label {display: inherit !important;} Finally, you'll want to actually update your template as well: change the line " @import url(http://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Lato:100,300,400,700,900);" to "@import url(https://fonts.googleapis.com/css?family=Lato:100,300,400,700,900);" in order for your custom fonts to load correctly.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎03-17-2020

Hi Crystal, There aren't bigger images that I know of—because those are the assets that are used inside Marketo itself. Now, if you were looking for larger and more modern images, Sky uses SVGs in its UI, meaning those assets infinitely scale up and down correctly, and grabbing those are pretty straightforward.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎02-28-2020

Update: As of 2020-02-28, this behavior no longer occurs! Sending samples of templates actually does exactly what this ticket suggests—it sends the code itself as expected with all mktoAddByDefault modules. Thanks, whoever fixed this.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎02-24-2020

ContentAI currently tries to generate an image (with or without content title, CTA, etc.) for placing content in an email. However, this results in the predictive content failing to have much customizability in display, and more importantly, causes the predictive content to be inaccessible. The final code output is an image with no alt text or identifying title in the link. Rather than trying to dynamically generate an image with all content included, could the setup be changed to retrieve the image, URL, title, and call to action as separate items? This both prevents having to create more image template styles or customization for customers and allows developers to code to standards for accessibility compliance.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎02-18-2020

@Monica_Wright wrote: Thanks for such a prompt response. But there is no direct way to report on the people who use list-unsubscribe, correct? We are noticing mostly because we are tracking our unsubscribe pages using hidden fields, and list-unsubscribe is simply those unsubscribed people without those fields. What you can do in a case like this is actually use the Reason constraint on an Data Value Change for unsubscribed ("Reason contains from list unsubscribe") to actively trigger off this behavior. If you're segmenting your emails by content in a subscription preference center-type setup, you can also use that trigger in conjunction with the Unsubscribed from Email activity filter to set data appropriately. As for Email Performance Reports, I would recommend just avoiding them in general and reporting off email statuses instead.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎02-18-2020

While there's a lot of use from the mktoActive and mktoAddByDefault attributes when defining modules for email templates, there's a more common problem that hasn't been addressed with template attributes: requiring a module to be on all emails within a template. Sometimes, it doesn't make sense to include a header/footer/etc. outside of .mktoContainer, so Marketo users may be stuck with trusting that other users will keep modules within an email for compliance reasons--think a module that has boilerplate legal text or subscription information. In a case like that, you'd want that module to always be in the email, so the ability to do something like mktoRequired="true" in conjunction with mktoAddByDefault would address this problem. This gets even more powerful if order is respected, so, if you have a header module, middle module, and footer module all set to be required, you could allow content to go between header and middle or middle and footer to force brand guidelines.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎02-14-2020

One of the main uses of the Get Lead Changes endpoint for the REST API is to retrieve previous value data, often when some process has gone awry and values need to be reverted. In high-activity instances, there may be several things changing a data value, however—even if you attempt to constrain by using a generated static list for relevant changes, if a value changes multiple times, you wind up getting noise in your results to try to find the original data value change. Given that all Data Value Change activities will always have an associated Reason attribute, would it be possible to add a Reason filter when retrieving data? This would streamline the process of retrieving data for reversions.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎02-13-2020

Hi Jacek, So, you're really looking at two separate problems: 1. Determining the proper Case to pull content into the email is going to happen through Velocity. Now, depending on your logic on how to match Case to email content, there'll be different logic to write in Velocity (or else I'd at least provide some basic guidance). Do note that you can only pull from the ten most recent Cases when using Velocity, so if this is an issue, you may need to look at other methods. 2. The most straightforward way to send data back to the case from Marketo is to use Email-to-Case as a reply—because Marketo will have no problem with that method. Matching to the proper case depends on some specific Salesforce setup pieces, but it's definitely doable with the right guidance.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-23-2020

Agreed with Sanford--why not use the existing link ID setup? I do something in a bit of reverse where I assign all of an email's standard links (logo, social icons, whatever) a specific link ID prefix so they may be screened out for reports, Smart List triggers, and so forth. There's an appropriate link ID constraint on anything involving clicks.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-23-2020

Straightforward request: because mktoString variables can be referenced inside editable mktoText areas in emails, they automatically are copied into the text version of emails. However, because the text version of the email does not process email module variables, only the variable name itself shows up. Can the text version please copy the variable when the variable is a string? It's understandable that others don't copy over, but strings are valuable in a variety of contexts.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-14-2020

So, what you're describing is essentially an ETL tool's responsibility, and there are plenty that work with both Marketo and Azure SQL DWH/Azure Data Lake; both on-prem (Boomi, Alteryx, et al.) and SaaS (Fivetran, Stitch, Alooma, et al.) ETLs can handle this sort of work on a scheduled, automatic basis.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-14-2020

The offset you receive in the response from the endpoint lets you page through total results per the max return you've set--so you'd continue paging through the results via offset until you hit a number under 200. At that point, you'd have your count of folders. There's no meta "total" value, as the results themselves are what you're supposed to tabulate to figure that out.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-14-2020

On a basic level, Marketo writes cookies to the domain .example.com, meaning that the cookie should be readable from any given subdomain. Now, there are complications with two-letter TLDs, and if you have a non-standard deployment of how your cookies are recorded, that can cause issues. But, by default, everything should work according to your example without issue. Now, there may not be Munchkin.js initialized on store.example.com compared to example.com, and that could explain the lack of visibility in the activity log. But it's not because Munchkin.js can't read the cookie.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-14-2020

Based on the information you've given so far, it's actually pretty hard to tell why this might be happening. I would at least start by seeing if there's discrepancies by source (form integration vs. upload), because it sounds like the object setup itself is fine--it's getting the data in. Look for patterns and work backwards. Although I'm a little suspicious of any sort of form integration as it relates to custom objects, because that needs to be set up correctly to its own external server-side service in order for that to work.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-14-2020

Yes, this can be done--I personally do a variant of this using fieldsets to determine pages rather than multiple forms--but it does require some JavaScript development.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-09-2020

In a case like this, your best bet is probably to handle such a redirect at the DNS level. Now, while it's strongly discouraged because you're doing two lookups, it's totally possible to do something like info-old IN CNAME your-instance.mktoweb.com. info IN CNAME info-old So when you look up info, it goes to info-old, then to your-instance.mktoweb.com. However, what you're describing sounds more like swapping the root domain rather than the CNAME. Same concept applies, though. Depending on your DNS provider, you may be able to set up redirects rather than chaining CNAMEs, but it's a non-standard thing and depends on who you have.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-06-2020

Again, I'm a little confused--how is that different than the existing description aside from UX/placement? I'm not trying to be obstinate but just trying to understand how that differs from today's description, which can be added under the field name per my screenshot.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎01-06-2020

I'm a bit confused on this ask—are you referring to something separate from the existing description today on individual fields? (The UI to add descriptions and its locking of lines for multi-line descriptions is wonky, I'll give you that.)

Courtney_Grimes · ‎12-19-2019

Agree with Sandy that this should work as expected if the form is on a Marketo LP for labels and the like, but one minor word of caution for the token-happy/anyone stumbling upon this later: while you can also place tokens in other parts of a form, such as with picklist values, know that using them there can cause some glitches within the form editor UI due to the way that's set up.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎12-18-2019

When setting a language on forms, there is some automatic translation of common form labels—this is great and helps save time when doing multilingual work. However, in the Japanese translation, there's a bit of clunky wording: First Name as 「ファーストネーム」 Last Name as 「ラストネーム」 The fact that these are written as loan words isn't really accurate, as you'd expect First Name: 名 Last Name: 姓 In fact, Marketo's own Japanese contact form uses the more common way of expressing given name/surname. Could this be updated in the product itself?

Courtney_Grimes · ‎11-08-2019

My understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that it is only the domain the cookie is setting from when third-party that needs to be secure (e.g., if you go to an HTTP-only site but the third party is HTTPS, you can still set a secure flag on the cookie)—strictly speaking, the secure flag only provides confidentiality and not integrity. That would only put the onus on marketo.net to be secure, and it already is. What you're implying—that there's no way to implement secure;SameSite=none while being insecure—would be a much larger implication of "oh hey everyone using any sort of adtech must have TLS by Chrome 80 for first-party or it'll break", and I just don't see that as the case here.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎11-06-2019

So, I'd actually like to advocate for two items that were previously on the Marketo roadmap but seem to have gone missing: Field Metadata API and User Provisioning API. The two most common things I do when in the Admin section are either creating fields or handling users—and the idea behind both of these APIs were to solve common pain points around both. By having a Field Metadata API, third-party integrations could add/update fields as needed rather than forcing the end user to enter fields by hand. Likewise, the ability to mass hide outdated fields would be a big boon--I once spent nearly 20 hours hiding ~700 fields from a client instance, and I could have just as easily done that in 20 minutes with an API call that would let me review fields and then post an update to hide them from UI. Likewise, with most enterprises onboarding/offboarding marketing employees, there's automation for adding and removing Exchange inboxes, Salesforce users, HR software logins... but no way to hook Marketo into this setup. As such, you're stuck adding and removing users manually, which is a pain. There's no reason a user API couldn't just hook into Workday or other HR systems to make this part of the onboard/offboard process. These things don't sound cool or appealing, so they tend to die on the vine--but the convenience they afford when given context makes them worth it.

Courtney_Grimes · ‎10-31-2019

Upcoming changes to Chromium are enforcing better policies around using Secure and SameSite flags in cookies. Unfortunately, this conflicts with the way Marketo writes cookies today and could potentially cause major issues for Marketo customers once this is rolled out—Microsoft and Mozilla are also planning to treat cookie flags differently around the same time. Could cookie writing please be updated at a minimum to have the Secure flag set (and preferably explicitly declare SameSite=None when appropriate on third-party values and Lax on first-party)? Otherwise, this could lead to headaches. Getting it prioritized now will ensure the transition is seamless for Marketo customers.

Online Status	Offline
Date Last Visited	36m ago

Name
Location	San Diego, CA
Date Registered	‎10-29-2014 04:04 PM
Date Last Visited	36m ago
Total Messages Posted	637
Total Tags	14
Likes Received	1045

Prevent Marketo Custom Object Field API Names from...

Re: Expose calculated time zones from Recipient Ti...

Add MIME type as an optional parameter to files.js...

Add checksum hashing to files stored in Design Stu...

Re: SSO User Provisioning

Re: Invalid Module: #template-wrapper > table:nth-...

Re: Issues sharing our landing pages on Twitter, a...

Re: How to center a form on a landing page?

Re: Marketo High Resolution Icons

Re: Fix code alterations that occur when sending e...

Make ContentAI Accessible When used in Emails/Allo...

Re: Do people who use the list-unsubscribe header ...

Create a "required" setting for email template mod...

Add parameter for querying against Reason attribut...

Re: Reading Salesforce Case Data and Writing Back

Re: Tag Specific Links as "CTAs" for Deeper Report...

Support mktoString rendering in text versions of e...

Re: Automatically pull data into a data lake?

Re: How paginate through get folders bulk API

Re: Munchkin Tracking Across Sub-Domains

Re: Custom Object link is not working for new reco...

Re: Marketo Forms advanced layout features

Re: Root level redirect

Re: Add an area called "Field Description" to Fie...

Re: Add an area called "Field Description" to Fie...

Re: Do tokens still work in form fields?

Correct Automatic Translation on Japanese Forms

Re: Update Marketo cookie setting to not break in ...

Re: Administration is the key(bunch)

Update Marketo cookie setting to not break in Chro...