CharlyBrown

To install several versions of a programme in parallel and even use them at the same time, there is a simple procedure that only requires disk space. I developed it > 30 years ago for an FE programme and a renowned company has adopted it for their very well-known CAD package. My question now is, is it also realised with the Affinity programmes that one can use both versions in parallel - e.g. to transfer parts from one document to the other via cut & paste?

@MikeTO, @Lorox, @LondonSquirrel, ... and what bothers me is that in this topic, which is about the parallel installation of V1 and V2, you are discussing things that have nothing to do with this topic. Please open a separate topic and move your posts there.

how can I install the affinity suite v2 in parallel to a standard installation of v2 to use both versions of the suite.

Please can you post the link to the "appropriate section of the forums" - thanks a lot

Nobody says, that there should be a switch without warning or choice. As I described, there must be a switch how to handle columns, and in addition there can be a switch old style – new style. I'm sure, in each file there is the information with which version it was filed last time. And using this there should be a clear warning when trying to update the TOC.

This may be one way to do it in the software, but too simple. What's about [maybe "forgotten"] headers covered by a picture frame? You don't see the header, only the picture, but in the TOC you will see the header. So the software should first create a list with positions of the entries and their visibilities and create then the TOC using the position. And here is the next question: You have more than one column, either independent or dependent. How should the TOC be build? There should be a switch to determine whether (a) the entries of a column are before the entries of the next column, or (b) the entries are looked up according to the vertical position and when there are more than one from left to right (or in some countries from right to left). A TOC should be independent of the layer structure as many people try to order the layers as they appear on a page - to find everything really fast. And often the "layers" are not real layers, they are more representatives of boxes.

What is the sense, working like this. I especially arranged the Layers as they appear on the page, except when a special group / frame has to be above the other layers to hide the content of the layers below – like pictures and their description. For me this is the natural order, or is my thinking wrong?