Actually it's rather something like "anything that a piece of software is unable to do, but logically should be, e.g. by the nature of the existing settings or other logic implied by the usual usage of existing features".

Users don't care if the problem si caused e.g. by a typo or wrong condition in code (i.e. a real bug by your definition) or simply by "oh, the author has not thought about that possibility" (i.e. bad design or simply limited imagination/knowledge).
So from this simple, transparent and common-sensical perspective is the inability to parse HTML from attribute content clearly "a bug"... simply because there are no technical reasons why it should not work, there is no clear clue suggesting (or documentation saying) that it should not work... so users logically expect it to work.

An "enhancement" would be e.g. implementing full embedded content processing to Excel parser. Such functionality is currently not there at all (the existing regex processing is kind of part of the Excel parser, it does not use the generic embedded content processors), so yes, implementing this is an enhancement.
But once it's implemented, it will be expected to work on ANY content which the Excel parser is able to extract (or, if there would be any technical limitations, or if only partial functionality will be implemented, it will be expected to be clearly documented). Users are not interested in excuses like "the developer never intended (read: has not though of) to parse HTML from an ActiveX control caption".

The point i sthat we are not talking about 20 EUR shareware produced by someone in his spare time, we are talking about 2k+ EUR software produced by "industry leader". So I guess it's not that much that users paying so much money expect a "logically implied" functionality.

Paul said:

It makes a difference in where it sits in the priority of work because fixing something that is broken is a lot different to adding something that was never there in the first place.

Hehe, this different prioritisation is precisely one of the reasons why I refuse to call such things enhancement.
Because the fact that it was never there is actually the bug ;-) And that's why it's not adding NEW functionality, but adding something what should have logically been always there... Do you feel the difference? ;-) I bet you personally do... but for some reason I don't believe the "prioritisation commitee" does... which effectively makes such "enhancement requirement" stillborn :-\

And I feel basically the same about the suggestions in Ideas section :-\
Plus, the evaluations of the ideas seem to be done in quite weird way - I just quickly went through a few ideas marked as Delivered and sorted by the highest score and majority of them were simply NOT delivered, but just incorrectly understood (and subsequently marked as delivered). Another bunch of ideas is "solved" by recommending to use some 3rd party plugins/apps :-\. And I'm wondering how many of the maybe hundreds(?) of ideas submitted in the last year(!) were REALLY and FULLY implemented...

And that's where the cost of the software of course starts to matter... While one would really not expect much from a spare-time "fan programming" one-man project, the expectation is dramatically different when one pays lot of money AND the product claims to be industry-standard created by industry-leader, backed by big company's numerous development teams. Then one simply expects to get something back... But, looking through the forums, basically anything what goes beyond trivial things like resetting Studio profile or using the appropriate file type and/or filetype setting options is just left unsolved for years... :-\
Eventhough I may understand various aspects from "the other side of the story", I still have the right to feel frustrated and perhaps also somehow betrayed...

Hello all, Paul Filkin, Evzen Polenka,

I had the same issue, and I resolved it with the following:

Having done this, html control characters have been converted to tags.

And this is the XML:

Cheers!

Pavlos

Pavlos Ponos
Localization Engineer

Tell the world.

NLG GmbH
+30.2310.502.192 ext. 6259         
NLGworldwide.com

Follow us on LinkedIn | Visit our New Website

NLG GmbH said:

I had the same issue, and I resolved it with the following:

Hi NLG GmbH

I think you are just handling the elements and not html code inside an attribute.  That's the problem.

Hello Paul Filkin,

This is the closest thing I can consider in these cases, at least it works in my case.