M44

Of course that is not a solution, and it's no secret to just use other software for some features or entirely, that's not the point. I am using this software, and this bug is a major bug. To be honest with you, that is not fair at all, this is a straight up bug and regardless of how this software is used, should work as expected. Otherwise, why are unit changes available in the first place? This is definitely not limited to CAD usage, and this software is targeted for people who design vector art graphics and media for print, and when used in this matter, some need elements to be a certain physical size when printing and that is more than reasonable to expect.

How are we supposed to know when this bug fix is supposed to happen, or when it does happen, is there a notification or something?

If a canvas has many elements on it, then later needs to be resized to allow more space, the processing it takes to do so (in anchor mode or rescale mode) is excessive and completely unnecessary. I have confirmed it is unnecessary by selecting all the elements on the page and hiding them first then resizing, and it happens almost instantly. I have noticed many things of this same nature happening and they all have the same pattern: things are being unnecessarily processed. Many of these are only noticeable when many elements are on the page, but it still does not mean it should not be optimized. Another similar scenario is if the snap tool is active, any change is considered for snapping, even though it does not qualify. A prime example of this is when using the text tool. When using it, simply clicking a place for it to start a field uses tremendous amount of processing.... and to make matters worse, every keystroke thereafter is susceptible to the same processing. This is not the case if snapping is turned off, which is how I know it is the snapping process that is causing it. We can agree that both clicking to start a field, and typing individual characters does not need to be considered for snapping in any case.

Thank you for this consideration. This item has been marked as fixed in the past, but was not. This is actually very crucial to my workflow. Of course nagging for something to be fixed is not the most effective way to get things done, but having created a tremendous amount of work in affinity designer that now needs to be used in production is not a possibility, I am stumped as to how to move forward. It's not like I can just use another program at this point, I am stuck within Affinity Designer and there is no way to even export the work at all to retain its proper dimensions. If you take a moment to think about my scenario, you too would agree that something like this is mission critical, and completely blocking from moving forward or using a workaround. If I could I would, and spare you the whining, but I cannot, and it really does not appear like it would be any work at all on your part to do, since this is actually just exporting units as is, without additional modification.

Bug: When the document is exported to SVG format, the units and values are compromised Proposed Solution: Respect the unit configuration in the document setup, and don't do any conversions, just export the values as they are in the document. Description: When the document setup has units set to mm, the exported SVG defines the dimensions in pixels. Actually regardless of any setup, the export of SVG is in pixels. It's frustrating that there is no DXF support, so can you at least fix the SVG dimensions to export in proper units? I've tried every combination of export SVG "more" options, but no luck. Technically what seems to be happening is that you are calculating the pixels based on the document DPI setting and making a viewBox with the most awkward "user coordinate system" that is in pixels derived from the DPI against the unit used. Honestly, DPI should have nothing to do with this, and it seems that this DPI setting in Affinity Designer is unnecessarily creating problems where it shouldn't be, here and in other places. What is concerning is if you import an SVG from another application that has mm units, it is imported with the expected identical structure. When you use the export provided by Affinity Design, and then reimport it to the same program, it is not identical, but rather distorted in very strange ways. Clearly his is a side effect from the erroneous unit conversions. Comments: Do you understand how much easier it would be for you to simply skip the DPI and skip the calculations and just give straight 1:1 unit definition in the xml output? It really seems that you are overcomplicating the situation and doing unnecessary conversions, which even if they did coincidentally match up with the current DPI, would still be slightly off due to the floating points that are being rounded. You do realize that SVG has built in unit support right? You can explicitly set all dimensional properties in mm (height="20mm")

I this really the answer we get from the Affinity Team? After all your loyal customers have stuck around and are constantly voicing their needs in regards to this feature, you come around and advise this? We all have macs, and all of us have alternate software on macs to very easily import/export DXF. If your advice is to switch to Windows and use another software to deal with this, then you have taken our existing cumbersome process and turned it even more ridiculous. You are also very clearly oblivious to what our need is in the first place if your advice is to do something completely and utterly retarded. As I have mentioned before I already have CoreDraw 2020, which at this point is the better software and I'm sticking with that. I advise everyone else to move on and do the same as it seems that this low priority change will actually never be released. They have way more important things to do like change their logos and splash screens. I'm out.

Yes, it's definitely clear that this is a political decision, not a logical one indeed. As I mentioned in a previous post, this solution can be embedded in a couple of hours, but let's give 400% padding and say a couple of days.. I offered money, I offered to actually code it for them and I'm offering my time and investment into this. I'm just trying to think of anything to give to persuade them against this nasty political decision for whatever reason. I can agree that my monetary offer is distasteful, but I'm really just trying to get their attention and motivate them and I just can't think of anything else. How can this be literally ignored this entire time? I'm questioning the legitimacy of this entire forum section if this is how its being handled, why do we even have it at all? Do they really care this much less about our sincere and genuine needs? I mean, come on now, we're not asking for a dark theme or spinning rims, we're asking for a mission critical update. I'm exhausted from all this begging, I think it's time I just move on.

I definitely thought about it, and yes, I partially agree with you. You follow your statement with exactly why I reposted this in the first place, and it's because no, were not being heard. This request has been here for over 5 years, everyone is very anxious to get this feature in, just look at its following and heavy activity. I posted this here because I want them to acknowledge my offer and the fact that everyone has been asking nicely for 5 full years to simply get a "hint" that this may come into place. They don't need tp publicly accept my offer, that was not the point. the point was to get their attention somehow and even if a response in private was received, then that is good enough. You really don't think I have emailed them about this? You really think that we have not exhausted all our options and are reaching a dead end? Honestly, that is what is more irritating than me reposting, is the fact that you can't even see the struggle. Indeed I am waving my money, and I am protesting to be heard, why does that bother you so much in a forum that is dedicated to talk about these off topic type posts. You really got irritated/offended that you saw another post talking about the same feature? Because there are zero duplicates of any of these types of posts in this whole forum right? We have emailed them, we have tweeted them, we have been posting aggressively in this forum to get it, and we are not even getting a wink that anything is going to happen, so yes, trying to get their attention using another tactic is something that is inevitable. I'll delete this post immediately if anyone else expresses the same concern. However.... I do get the feeling that many people are siding with me on this.

Also, sorry for making it repetitive, but my offer that has already been on the table for a very long time now, might not be here for much longer. The reason as I stated in the other post is that we have invested in CorelDraw for the interim, and will not be able to revert everything back if the integration is not done within a reasonable time. Offer may still be on the table for 2-3 weeks from today. (The change doesn't have to be completed by then, I just want a confirmation that it would at-least be put into the queue.

Just in case my post in the other long thread was lost, I decided to make another one to bump and spotlight my offer: Ok it seems that there are no incentives to get you to finally get this feature in, so I would like to know if making a donation of $20,000 would help change your mind and actually introduce this ability in the software stack. I understand that this is not that much money compared to to your regular expenses, but please accept my offer to show a genuine need for this. Just to get a little bit of a background, I have tried several several CAD programs, unfortunately they are all horrible applications, and honestly I would not be surprised if they were built all off of the same engine, because they behave exactly the same, are extremely clunky and the performance on every single one of them is horrible. (I have a 24core xeon Mac Pro with 128GB of RAM and 2 extremely high end video cards... so this is not because of my hardware, I assure you) I enjoy the affinity program and the tools it offers, but I need to be able to export my technical drawings with their dimensional information and I cannot at the moment. To say that this is a necessary feature is an understatement, I actually NEED this to run my business and the workarounds to get this done are laughable and very cost inefficient. Please, at least say if you really are going to release this and if its anytime soon, I really want to use this program.

It's definitely edited. Just need to get this through their head. I do not want to be their backseat driver.... but If I see them making a wrong turn on a one way street, I'm definitely going to say something about it. What is so mind boggling, is that the actual integration of this is not something that would take more than 1-2 days to implement, and maybe 4-5 days of testing. I know this because I am very familiar with the OpenDXF/DWG libraries, I have them already compiled into a process that checks my folder now to see if any svg files are saved, and once any svg file hits the folder it automatically has the dxf version of it with the same name next to it. It does an excellent job in automatically converting it to it's exact ratios and dimensions, when opened in AutoCAD its recognized as a native format and all elements are still there with their native shapes and object types and layers and grouping. And it didn't take longer than 1 hour to fully understand the deserialization of the vector format and use the DXF libraries to serialize them back into a perfect DXF format, and create a FS listener to check for files and apply this method to them. In addition to my donation, I would even offer the development time to do it myself for them, but they do not have a public plugin system nor would they share their closed course code, so that is why I'm just asking nicely for them to do it. It really is a frustrating situation when you are at the mercy of someone else because you need to play by their rules, but then their rules are having a negative impact on your lifestyle. They have a lot of priorities yes, but they do not understand the impact of this particular feature. Like really. If they know the truth, then I have no doubt in my mind that they would actually drop every single thing they are doing and put all their developers on this item and this item only.

Imagine a world where.......

And Guys, just in case you didn't know, CorelDraw2020 for Mac (not CorelCAD) is that perfect middle grounds between CAD and Ai and Affiinity Designer type drawing (I wish someone would have told me this earlier before I spent way too much money and time testing out every CAD program out there). Yes it is expensive, but trust me when I say that for the line of work that we do (which is technical 2d drawings for laser cutting and printed circuit board/gerber production) that this is the best anyone is ever gunna get. We just started investing into CorelDraw recently, and I really hope Affinity does something about this before we get too deep into Corel to want to switch back out of it.. I do not want to retract my offer as it still stands, but it won't really make sense to push so hard if we're already so far into CorelDraw. CorelDraw is surprisingly nice and smooth, similar to Affinity, but Affinity definitely still wins as far as UI, smooth operations and handling of their toolset. You can just tell that there is rich fluid movement in the pen tool for instance or switching an objects location, or resizing something... CorelDraw is good, but still behind AD in this matter. Am I the only one that absolutely hates real CAD program execution and procedure? It really does feel like I'm working while someone is choking me the entire time, feeling very constricted in my movement of tools. CorelDraw has a beautiful set of export options that surprised me, and I was sold on the spot. Gosh I sound like a CorelDraw salesman, but man, if only you knew how much I just wanted the dang DXF/DWG export/import handling in affinity, it would be my complete perfect solution!!

Ok it seems that there are no incentives to get you to finally get this feature in, so I would like to know if making a donation of $20,000 would help change your mind and actually introduce this ability in the software stack. I understand that this is not that much money compared to to your regular expenses, but please accept my offer to show a genuine need for this. Just to get a little bit of a background, I have tried several several CAD programs, unfortunately they are all horrible applications, and honestly I would not be surprised if they were built all off of the same engine, because they behave exactly the same, are extremely clunky and the performance on every single one of them is horrible. (I have a 24core xeon Mac Pro with 128GB of RAM and 2 extremely high end video cards... so this is not because of my hardware, I assure you) I enjoy the affinity program and the tools it offers, but I need to be able to export my technical drawings with their dimensional information and I cannot at the moment. To say that this is a necessary feature is an understatement, I actually NEED this to run my business and the workarounds to get this done are laughable and very cost inefficient.\ Please, at least say if you rally are going to release this and if its anytime soon, I really want to use this program.