SRThomp

I'm clear on the chain/padlock, ha ha! However it appears that a valuable feature is missing in Designer that exists in all other programs I know of. Perhaps we can get it on the wish list for suggested feature upgrades?
In other programs you can free-resize something by grabbing a corner handle and stretching or shrinking and either watch a changing percentage box as you scale OR see an end result percentage of change. This allows for eyeballing a design when you don't already know a given percentage that you want to resize by. Once the size looks good, you now have the percentage of change that you can use for other items as desired, using your 75+25% method.
Now that I know how Designer works I can do multiple +% trial and error guesses but the other method is a real time saver.
Thanks everyone.

The use of Affinity Workbooks may depend on how you learn software. Posts appeared on the forum that yearn for the APub workbook, so some people obviously like to use it.
I personally could not learn with the workbook for ADesigner, because it rather explains along single design projects, less than along software functions – that can make it difficult to find and understand all possible workflows for a specific feature. The keyword index at the end illustrates the issue: e.g. for the Fill Tool the index shows 9 (!) page numbers spread throughout the entire book (18, 104, (...), 248 ... 350 ... 419). So to get informed about a specific feature you possibly need to jump a lot. Physically the workbook is not very comfortable (heavy paper, thick, tending to close itself). Its flexible layout may look appealing, but also with a negative impact on reading orientation.
Personally I prefer to learn software with a reference manual. Guided e.g. along its UI main menu, and in a simple, clean and consequent layout, with all aspects of a feature within its single chapter and in a consequent use of language and its terms. In my experience the lenght of the keyword index and a slim but complete amount of various pages per topic is a good indicator for the quality of a such a reference. (e.g. I appreciated much the ancient, printed "User Manuals" for Adobe apps)
The Affinity (online) help seems to be the closest available source for this approach. Unfortunately it doesn't cover all aspects and its wording sounds unclear occasionally. It shows its full content only in its English version (it lacks in screenshot images in the other languages).    https://affinity.help/

I want to do exactly what is described by Kleu at the start of this topic. I want the frame to be fixed and be able to automatically adjust the text size so that it fits exactly to the fixed size/shape frame/s. Clicking the handles and blue dot right bottom changes the frame, not the text.

No worries! It’s an easy mistake to make, especially if you haven’t had the benefit of experiencing the capabilities that PagePlus acquired over thirty years of development.

It would work like art boards. So e request. It will be so powerful…

Right now, you can delete, duplicate pages on the left of Affinity Publisher. I would like to have the oppertunity to HIDE or SHOW pages. So you can make a document and hide pages. This will make my workflow easier. Just one document for two versions.

I can't see if this is allready possible. I haven't found it. 
When you pick an page in the left window. Then click on the right button of the mouse, now you can "hide" a page. The page will be grayed out. Like in example above. If you click right on a allready hidden page, you can select "show". That is the original state. 
Please!!!!
 
Kind regards,
 
Jan
 

I think FrustratedandConfused means the optional set of alignment (and distribution and spacing) icons that a user can add to the Toolbar using View > Customize Toolbar:

The Align tools, at least, don't provide any options. They're similar in that regard to the items available via the menus. (Note: This screenshot is from Designer, but the capabilities in Publisher are similar.)
That set of disparate capabilities is probably not obvious to a new user, who may think "Oh, I can get all the functions as buttons, without needing multiple clicks to expand the one Alignment button".

The problem with doing that is you lost formatting when cutting and pasting within the same document. What I suspect you (and I) really want is for Affinity Publisher to offer a setting like this:
Paste from other applications: <paste with format | paste without format>
I know some people would prefer to paste with format because they want to leverage MS Word styles, while people like you and me don't want styles created when importing copy from an external source.

Thanks for this @Old Bruce, I really appreciate you taking the time. 

However, as my understanding goes (I just tested and can confirm it does act as follows) Replace Existing removes all masters from a page and replace with the selected master. This is a problem, because in some cases a page has multiple masters I don't want deleted.
For example, multiple pages in my document have Masters A, C and F.
I want them to have Masters A, C and D.
If I understand you (and the documentation) correctly, the only way I can achieve this is by removing Master F,
— either by deleting the master altogether, which then also removes it from pages I do want it on or
— deleting it manually from each page in the layers panel (which can get time consuming in a 100 page manuscript)
then adding Master D, again:
— either by apply it to all odd/even pages and deleting from the pages I don't want it on, or
— listing every single page I need it applied to.
Is my understanding of this correct? Because if it is, the available control of Master Pages still feels a little... limited.
Don't get me wrong here. I love the software, and the Master Pages feature is super useful. But I do feel that the control we have (especially in large manuscripts) could be improved.

That does solve OP's problem (and mine, hence this response), but in a much more terminal manner than I would like.
Is there no option to simply remove a specific master from all pages (or even better, a specific set of pages) without having to delete the master entirely?
My use case is as follows:
1. I have two numbering and runner masters; one for left-hand pages and one for right-hand pages
2. However, there are a number of pages that don't need the master (i.e. content title pages)
3. When I have to export a sample of the manuscript for review, it needs page numbering. However, if I needed to add an odd number of pages the masters switch to the incorrect pages (i.e. left on right). Thus, I either have to:
a: Delete the master entirely, recreate it, and reapply it or
b: Manually remove it from every page it is on before reapplying it again

I'd much rather be able to just "Remove Master From [selection] Page(s)", and then go reapply it where necessary.

Is that actually possible and I'm just missing it? If not, is there any chance that feature might become a thing in the future?
————————————
 
Adjacent to this issue, it would be excellent if we had a Master Page overview manager tool, which, on top of the current options available in the right click menu (i.e. inserting, applying, deleting etc.) would provide the following functionality:
1. Provide an overview of all master pages, and how many pages each has been used on (which also allows you to navigate to said page)
2. Allow the user to see which pages of the manuscript is using which master page (at a glance)
3. Allow the user to remove masters from specific pages without having to leave the tool
4. Allow the user to add masters to specific pages without having to leave the tool
5. Allow the user to define specific pages that should not receive any masters (even if "Apply to all/even/odd" is selected)

Is there any chance of something like that happening?

Thank you it does. That same icon in the combined grouping (or any other) does not function the same. Hope this updates in the future or at least the graphic. Appreciate it.

glad to see this response - my question is the same but I cannot make this work on a SPREAD. It is going to the center of the spread.
I do not find it practical to rely on that green line on a 125 page document as my Hand/Eye coordination has been compromised due to illness. 

as a old X9 user there was the option to align to page or align to spread. Is there something that I am missing other than calculating center points and relying on the "green line" as a guide? Please and thank you??

Yes. With the page selected, the Layers panel will show the applied master page at the bottom of the layer stack, and it will be locked. Unlock it.

Agreed. But at this point, any fix would be appreciated.

Instead of having to set this explicitly in Preferences, all of the apps should automatically set the top tool as the default.

Just to add that I also would very much appreciate the Move Tool being default (or a way of setting it as default being added). It is irritating to always have to switch from the View Tool. 

I would like to set in Preferences which tool is the default in all three applications. Until then I will put up with the annoyance that is "using software".

It is puzzling that almost all dedicated users say that something is completely unnecessary or unnecessary.
Forum users present their suggestions for changes and improvements in Affinity depending on their workflow and this should be respected. Personally, I never thought that an idea or improvement for someone was unnecessary.
When it comes to Affinity Photo, I also often start working with, for example, moving an object or clicking an object to check its size. And I would also prefer the Move Tool to be the default tool or let me set in the preferences what tool should be the default (to satisfy everyone) .

Yes, and No.
Yes, you can move the tools around and make the layout consistent with the other applications.
No, you cannot make the Move Tool the default tool in Photo. The default will remain the View Tool, as that is hard-coded into Photo no matter where the tool is located within the Tools panel.

I already suggested that Serif might need to consult Usability-Experts (not just UI-Designers) to check their products.
If you look closely, there are lots of postings in this forum that refer to flaws in the interface-design.

It seems to me that Serif is flooded with customer feedback (feature requests and bug reports likewise).
Perhaps they are victim of their own success?

kind regards
Fritz

These arguments seem to be becoming circular.
 
Let's be clear - Publisher is in its infancy.  As Patrick has said - we need to spend time putting in the core set of features that most people would expect.
 
The vast majority of Publisher users will not be ex-PagePlus users. Any time spent now on an importer is going to be of no value to them, and will be at the expense of features that everyone would use.
 
Since Publisher does not have the set of features supported by PagePlus, what would an importer give you right now?  50%, 40%, 30% of the features required to make an import meaningful?  So, we give you an importer now that transfers only the features we have. Are you going to be happy with the outcome, or are you then going to start asking for other features to be added that are required to import your old PagePlus document?  Where does it realistically end??  Most of the arguments being put forward for a specific importer over a PDF (or other) migration seem to rely on higher level features.
 
Right now you have a working solution - you can carry on using PagePlus to maintain your documents. That has not changed in any way due to the release of Publisher.  Anyone moving from Windows to Mac also is in no worse situation than they would have been if we had not released Publisher (so I don't see that as a valid argument either).   As Publisher matures, I would have expected users to author new content in it, supported by the features as they become available.

I have to say, that I am astonished at not having any way to Import PagePlus files. I got an invite by email to download the Beta as I am a Serif Customer, the main product I use is PagePlus. I have been using it for years, first with a company I worked for, then bought it myself. I have loads of files that I update regularly.
I understand new software, designed from scratch, not on the old platform, but I don't understand that there is no way to import PagePlus files. Surely there must be a way for you to do this for your existing customers, whether a stand alone app, a plug in or integrated into Affinity, I really think this is an essential. 
I use OpenOffice, if someone sends my a Microsoft Word file, I can open it with Open Office. Though it is completely different software, not built on the same code base, Open Office realise that they need to open MS Word files, as their users will need this facility. It doesn't always work perfectly because of the differences in the software features, but it does import them. I find it really hard to understand that Serif don't realise how important it is for customers to import files from their own old software. I don't expect PP to be able to open Affinity files, but I really did expect the new software to open the old files. 
The first thing I did when I opened the beta programme was to try and open an existing PagePlus file, well that didn't go well, then I looked on the forum to find out how to do it and found this thread. :(
In business it is a know fact that it is easier and cheaper to sell to existing customers that to acquire new customers. I guess a percentage of your existing customers will look elsewhere now. If they have to start from scratch anyway, they will look for a company that will support them and all their work long term. Where you could have made easy and cheap sales to existing customers, you will loose a bunch of those and have to market to new customers instead.
Me? I will continue to use PagePlus and when I need to update in the future, I will look at what is available. Maybe I will turn to Affinity, maybe not. But, where this was an opportunity for an easy sale to an existing customer, it has backfired I think.

This probably goes for the vast majority of PP users.
As has been said conversion might not be perfect but, given the choice between doing a little tidying up of a converted file and starting over completely from scratch I know which one I would prefer.