When I copy an image from one frame and paste it into another, I expect this action to preserve two sets of attributes: scaling factor and positioning data.

I get one out of two (scaling).

No offense, but QuarkXPress could do both back in 1990.

Why does this matter? Imagine a layout with a horizontal row of head shots, each in a separate frame of the same shape and size. Client says, "Oh, please move photo 3 to frame 10, and scoot everyone else up one frame."

I don't have to imagine this situation, as I'm currently working on a project with four spreads just like that, for a total of 60 images. Moving one image as described above is a lengthy process of copying and pasting (or trying to remember and type in) a whole bunch of x/y coordinates from one box to another.

I've looked for scripts to automate the process and come up empty handed.

This is so far beyond basic from a production standpoint that I really shouldn't have to explain why.

The ability to apply an image as a clipping mask to another image from within InDesign instead of needing to rely on other software like Photoshop would be really helpful.

I have hundreds of pages that need editing together with 1 - 3 images per page. Each of these images needs a png applied to them as a clipping mask with the text positioned around them. Currently the only way to do this in InDesign is to import something like a .psd file that you can't make live edits on. Constantly flicking between different software to get the layout right for a page is really time consuming.

Affinity Publisher allows this really easily by simply right clicking an image in the layers panel and selecting Mask to Below. It would be great to see InDesign implement this is such an easy to use way as well.

The images show the base black and white png you should be able to apply as a mask to a normal image and the effect it should give you. Currently InDesign's clipping masks don't respect the full transparency of the png because all they really do is change the frame and create a hard border.

Years have gone by without Adobe recognizing that InDesign is used for a LOT of annual reports that are chart-heavy. Built-in functionality in Illustrator is appalling at best, then to have to break a chart apart and literally re-type every label for potentially 100+ charts for a report is ridiculous. We need the ability to control the look and feel of a wide variety of charts natively (with the ability link to various data sources -- spreadsheet, odbc, etc.).

Alternatives?
Use Excel and export as a PDF and link it. However edits are onerous when you have to change the excel doc, re-output the pdf, and update the link. Text colors/sizing are never quite correct (let alone needing to make a change document-wide -- FORGET ABOUT IT), alignment never seems to be exact, and it's just a poor approach, honestly.

Another alternative (even recommended by admins here) is an expensive font that only uses whole numbers up to 100 (made that mistake, waste of money). Bar chart with decimals? Nope. Reporting on the GDP of a region? Can't do it.

For a company that's so focused on being data-driven, it's pretty ironic that we can't create compelling charts in one of your flagship products -- especially when products like Excel and PowerPoint can do it. What gives?

PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF YOUR USERS DO SOMETHING!!

I'm setting this student book and the designer made nice tables.
The tables have no touching intersection where row line meets column line.
It's approved by the client who loves these tables.
The problem is that the designer has drawn the lines by hand. As a typesetter you curse at it and find a solution for your 200+ tables, wich I did with a mix of paragraph borders and underlining/paragraphlines but I'm gonna cry pure salt if I need to make changes to this. With some clients you never know ;) I will attach a screenshot from a simple example.

It would be awesome if Indesign would let us tinker with the corners of the cells and include it in the cell style much like we do with rectangles/objectstyles.... Would this be possible?

It would be a massive time save if it were possible to change the Object Layers Options on multiple images at the same time.
We build four layer products images in PS with layers across all images named the same:
Product, FlatShadow, StandingShadow, Reflection
When we have 40 products on the page and the customer decides they want the products all to have a reflection, at the moment we have to switch each images Reflection layer on singly. Then in the next round the customer may decide they want no Reflection or Shadow at all. Again we have to switch the layer option on each images separately.

We've purposely set up all PSDs in the same way in the hopes that one day this will be possible.