Shirley Yeng 

The first part looks like a bug.  Sometimes using a different approach to achieve the same end can help so I also tried these and none of them work:

(\<[^>]*\>)
(\<.*?\>)
(\<[\S]*\>)
((?<=\<)[^>]*(?=\>))
((?<=\<)[\S]*(?=\>))

So for this we need to make sure a bug is logged, and in the meantime perhaps use the QA checker where you expression works just fine:

Shirley Yeng said:

Besides, how can I find segments that have <content> in Source but not in Target?

Use QA check again:

Prior to the advanced display filter the QA check was the goto method for this stuff... worth using again for now.

Shirley Yeng 

The first part looks like a bug.  Sometimes using a different approach to achieve the same end can help so I also tried these and none of them work:

(\<[^>]*\>)
(\<.*?\>)
(\<[\S]*\>)
((?<=\<)[^>]*(?=\>))
((?<=\<)[\S]*(?=\>))

So for this we need to make sure a bug is logged, and in the meantime perhaps use the QA checker where you expression works just fine:

Shirley Yeng said:

Besides, how can I find segments that have <content> in Source but not in Target?

Use QA check again:

Prior to the advanced display filter the QA check was the goto method for this stuff... worth using again for now.

Shirley Yeng 

The case reference for information is "Case Details - 00801212".  Once the support team confirm this is a bug (or not) I'll update this thread with the bug number.

Well noted, thank you very much 

Paul ,

Weird… Regex from Shirley Yeng works for me in ADF:

Same thing with a simplified regex in Source: (<.*?>)

 Jesús Prieto 

Try it with the specific source and target content she provided.

Shirley Yeng 

Just an update.  This has been confirmed as a bug and logged as our reference CRQ-34072. I don't have any timescales I'm afraid, but it is logged and we easily follow up with this number.

Got it :)