Hi, I understand phasing out Flash-based content, but forcing installation and use of the desktop proof viewer for HTML content is a huge inconvenience for our organization. Since the web-based viewer is built in HTML, why can't the viewer display HTML5 animations? Please restore Interactive HTML Pr...

We don't use the mobile app, but we're getting unwanted notifications for comments on proofs. We DO want "ProofHQ-style" notifications, when they are compiled according to the notifications we set in the proof (e.g., Hourly, Daily, etc.). Therefore we DON"T want a separate immediate email for each c...

Great news! Echoing my previous comment - please make it easy for anyone reading a completed custom form to distinguish the form questions from the entered content. Color, font weight, spacing - all these things will help tremendously. If those become user-defined settings, even better! And here's a...

Options for proof notifications should be more flexible... With the Daily option, please make it so the hour of notification can be optionally set for other than midnight, as it would be nice to have comments compiled towards the end of a work day without having to wait until 12 am. Would also like ...

This comment speaks more to the Custom Forms post-submission... Currently, reading the information on a completed Custom Form is much harder than it should be. This is a big pain point for when our team members try to sort through the info. The only thing differentiating the questions from the answ...

There needs to be a simple way to create a new version of an existing proof AND carry over settings (people, roles, notification frequency, message subject, message body) from the previous version as a starting point. These features exist in the standalone ProofHQ and need to be brought into the Wor...

Creating a subsequent version of an existing proof by dragging a new file on top of the first is very convenient, as it retains the settings of the previous proof. BUT preserving name of the initial proof (e.g. "filename_v1") without an option to retain the filename of the subsequent proof (e.g. "fi...

Since this the feature exists in the standalone version of ProofHQ , YES, should be ported to the integrated version, too!