Bit Dissapointed

It would be nice if the post could give some more context, specifically how it is related or integrated with Affinity Apps, and explain the use case.

The way I interpret the forum guidelines it is not allowed to post plain advertising for other apps, no matter of commercial or freeware. All content should have some relation to Affinity Apps, or work created by Affinity Apps.
A better way would be to create a small tutorial how to a achieve the specific effect by the external program as part of an workflow based on Affinity apps, e.g. including copy/paste, or export/import to integrate both Apps.
I don’t want to police this thread. As a user I want to get at least a short description about any links, so a can decide if it is worth my time to click that link.

It is software that can be used very creatively with Affinity or any other creative program, either as shown on the website or more cleverly, used for discrete effects. I've forgotten to use it for a few years, so thanks, I'm going to drag it into my work again.

I appreciate the response and agree with many of your points, however I still think the right button is a poor solution. To your main point about consistency across different select tools within Affinity, I agree this is the ideal scenario, and right now there is not consistency. On Windows, Right Mouse adds with the Flood Select tool whereas CTRL + ALT adds with the Shape Select. 
To build on your point on consistency within Affinity, I think consistency across different programs (non-Affinity products) is also important. Select, Add to Selection, and Deselect are not unique commands to Affinity - many programs have this basic capability, and they all use Shift, Alt, and Control. As a user that often switches between 4+ different programs within a single workday, and often multiple within a workflow to make a single graphic, consistency across these programs is greatly beneficial.
Also, a note on switching to Mac: I work for a company with over 1,000 employees that use Windows because it is the better operating system for nearly all of our programs in an industry that is dominated by Windows. Switching to Mac is not an option for me or my colleagues, let alone the industry. It sounds like the hotkeys on a Mac work very well, however on Windows they need refinement.

Operating LMB while holding RMB down to add to selection is very straining and awkward. Couldn't it be changed to for example Shift or… why aren't modifiers editable in the first place?
I'm sorry for making a new topic. The most fitting one about such subject was in V1 feedback forum and I would like to give feedback to V2
keywords in case someone tries to find a topic like this: right mouse button click add selection keyboard shortcut affinity photo V2

The unofficial Affinity Designer manual - probably made in PagePlus - to make cross references (!!!), footnotes and endnotes possible - would look like this, @MxHeppa

So a similar "1001 Workarounds for Affinity Publisher" could be handy as well

Does this mean that there will be no v2.2.2 etc. or simply that these will be handled in production groups/threads?

🥱 Yes, but I'm not a hobbyist, so I prioritise stability and performance above all else. 

Now I'm depressed. I struggle with and curse this bug every single day on the fast iPad Pro 2022 M2, and never imagined you didn't fix the problem in a subsequent 2.2.x fix.
I can't, may not, and won't use beta software for production work, so I'm going to be waiting months for a fix I don't know is coming, which is also frustrating.
 

There has always been inconsistent performance with the brush engine. It's improved over the years, but it's still not consistent enough for things like heavy amounts of rendering. It is better for mark-making, etc than long sustained rendering sessions, if this makes sense. I use other programs for painting compositions because at least if I encounter lag, it's generally fixed with a reduced brush size and I don't have to worry about specific environments or calibrated settings. I also cannot always have two views activated for certain brush types. Whereas in the other program I work in, I almost always have another window open with a zoomed out view. It just works.

I've never used this brush yet, so I just tried.
I'm not noticing any lag.

Apps: Publisher
Platforms: macOS, Windows and iPad
There is a new Tags panel in Affinity Publisher which allows you to add Alt-text to any image or object when exported to PDF for accessibility purposes.  To use just open the Tags panel from the Window menu, select the image or object you want to add Alt Text too and add your description in the box:

Alt Text Source
As well as adding your own custom description to any object, you can also choose to scrape the Alt Text from the Title, Description or Headline meta data which may be embedded within the image in question.

Mark as Decoration
You also have the option to “Mark as Decoration”. This means no image description will be exported or used by screen readers as the item is purely there for decorative purposes rather than important to the understanding of the document. It’s primarily there so you can positively tag an image as not needing a description so will not return as needing one in preflight.
Preflight
Options have also been added in preflight to make it easy to check your document for any missing Alt Text should you wish. When creating or editing a profile you will see a new section for Alt Text. Here you can choose whether you want preflight to return a warning if images, placed documents or vector objects do not have Alt Text added (or marked as decoration).

Export
In the advanced section of PDF export there is a new option of "Tagged PDF". This is required to be checked if you wish to export your PDF including any tags you have added. Currently this is off by default for all factory PDF presets, although we do intend to make this on by default for all non-print based factory PDF presets.
General note on accessibility features
I also just wanted to say that there are a number of accessibility features we are working on which will be added in upcoming updates such as reading order, heading tags and other document structure tools important for screen readers. For the time being, and so to not go off topic, please keep comments on this thread focused on the new Tags Panel / Alt Text feature added in this version.

I made a picture of an old-fashioned barometer because . . . well, because I can! Who needs an excuse? I discovered quite a while ago that I enjoy making things with scales and pointers, for some reason; and the Version 2 Duplicate dialogue makes it so much easier to make circular scales. The woodwork is created from a stock photo of a piece of wood, which I sawed into quarters and turned a profile edge (digitally, that is ). All the rest is made from vectors, using three photos for reference and picking out the best features. (There were some curlicues on the thermometer scales, but I forgot to do them! ) The red letters are from a freebie font called Great Victorian, which has plain and swashed cap forms.

Ah, we got passwords. 🙂
Now I think the time is ripe for Designer and Photo (and a bit easier in Publisher) to allow the entry of elementary document metadata, so that exported PDFs contain absolutely critical and necessary information about the origin: title, author, URL, etc. Specifically, I'm thinking of the fields called Document Information in Publisher, if I'm correct in my assumption that it's the content from these fields that will be displayed in Adobe Reader when viewing document information there.
It's not fair for Serif's Designer and Photo customers to have to purchase Publisher just to add or edit this information, and it's too cumbersome to have to go through Publisher to add this information if one DOES have Publisher. Furthermore, I believe many might not even understand that they need to go through Publisher and deep into the References submenu to even find and edit metadata in 'Fields'. This isn't user-friendly, and the worst part is that it blocks the discovery and use of this feature.
And if you implement this, Serif, the primary document information should (also) be enterable and viewable under something similar to document info/setup from the file menu. Not hidden away in fields.
All three programs should provide easy and logical access to these document details, which are not only needed for PDF export, but also for regular use in companies and educational institutions, as well as for archiving and tracking the employees who have created the content in the documents. I've always missed this feature.

Ah, we got passwords. 🙂
Now I think the time is ripe for Designer and Photo (and a bit easier in Publisher) to allow the entry of elementary document metadata, so that exported PDFs contain absolutely critical and necessary information about the origin: title, author, URL, etc. Specifically, I'm thinking of the fields called Document Information in Publisher, if I'm correct in my assumption that it's the content from these fields that will be displayed in Adobe Reader when viewing document information there.
It's not fair for Serif's Designer and Photo customers to have to purchase Publisher just to add or edit this information, and it's too cumbersome to have to go through Publisher to add this information if one DOES have Publisher. Furthermore, I believe many might not even understand that they need to go through Publisher and deep into the References submenu to even find and edit metadata in 'Fields'. This isn't user-friendly, and the worst part is that it blocks the discovery and use of this feature.
And if you implement this, Serif, the primary document information should (also) be enterable and viewable under something similar to document info/setup from the file menu. Not hidden away in fields.
All three programs should provide easy and logical access to these document details, which are not only needed for PDF export, but also for regular use in companies and educational institutions, as well as for archiving and tracking the employees who have created the content in the documents. I've always missed this feature.

Ah, we got passwords. 🙂
Now I think the time is ripe for Designer and Photo (and a bit easier in Publisher) to allow the entry of elementary document metadata, so that exported PDFs contain absolutely critical and necessary information about the origin: title, author, URL, etc. Specifically, I'm thinking of the fields called Document Information in Publisher, if I'm correct in my assumption that it's the content from these fields that will be displayed in Adobe Reader when viewing document information there.
It's not fair for Serif's Designer and Photo customers to have to purchase Publisher just to add or edit this information, and it's too cumbersome to have to go through Publisher to add this information if one DOES have Publisher. Furthermore, I believe many might not even understand that they need to go through Publisher and deep into the References submenu to even find and edit metadata in 'Fields'. This isn't user-friendly, and the worst part is that it blocks the discovery and use of this feature.
And if you implement this, Serif, the primary document information should (also) be enterable and viewable under something similar to document info/setup from the file menu. Not hidden away in fields.
All three programs should provide easy and logical access to these document details, which are not only needed for PDF export, but also for regular use in companies and educational institutions, as well as for archiving and tracking the employees who have created the content in the documents. I've always missed this feature.

Ah, we got passwords. 🙂
Now I think the time is ripe for Designer and Photo (and a bit easier in Publisher) to allow the entry of elementary document metadata, so that exported PDFs contain absolutely critical and necessary information about the origin: title, author, URL, etc. Specifically, I'm thinking of the fields called Document Information in Publisher, if I'm correct in my assumption that it's the content from these fields that will be displayed in Adobe Reader when viewing document information there.
It's not fair for Serif's Designer and Photo customers to have to purchase Publisher just to add or edit this information, and it's too cumbersome to have to go through Publisher to add this information if one DOES have Publisher. Furthermore, I believe many might not even understand that they need to go through Publisher and deep into the References submenu to even find and edit metadata in 'Fields'. This isn't user-friendly, and the worst part is that it blocks the discovery and use of this feature.
And if you implement this, Serif, the primary document information should (also) be enterable and viewable under something similar to document info/setup from the file menu. Not hidden away in fields.
All three programs should provide easy and logical access to these document details, which are not only needed for PDF export, but also for regular use in companies and educational institutions, as well as for archiving and tracking the employees who have created the content in the documents. I've always missed this feature.

There's no one in this thread who gave Serif a hard time or anything close to it. It's been quite normal communication between customer and company. At least by adult standards.
Serif has a wonderfully civilised approach to its forum where a lot is tolerated and recognised as legitimate feedback or criticism. In my many years as a passive observer and now active participant, I've barely seen any Serif staff write anything sensitive or moderate regular human communication and criticism. The overly sensitive reactions have almost exclusively come from customers who must live a sheltered life in a panic room at home with soft walls. The world has become a strange place where evolution, as Ricky Gervais rightly observes, has resulted in this strong human race ultimately... being afraid of... words.
If one spends a little less time in protected environments like online forums, and more at workplaces, in face to face debates between genuinely disagreeing individuals, and especially against the ultimate opponent, a confident mother-in-law, they would probably be a bit more resilient.
So, thank you to Serif for a high and mature standard.

I've seen an incredible amount of feedback from dissatisfied customers regarding contrast issues, and those with more knowledge about the actual requirements and recommendations for contrast have posted references to WGAC and much more. I can't understand at all how Serif avoids criticism and solutions, as the issue is genuinely significant and affects a lot of people. Moreover, I can't fathom the reasoning behind the utterly Satan-black interface in v2. Firstly, it's far too dark; on top of that, the contrast ratio between background, text, and elements is far too weak, and fundamentally, it's much too dark in relation to the recommendations for neutral environments and interfaces for graphic designers and photographers.
I've tried to save myself through the preferences, but it doesn't fix all the issues:
 

I've seen an incredible amount of feedback from dissatisfied customers regarding contrast issues, and those with more knowledge about the actual requirements and recommendations for contrast have posted references to WGAC and much more. I can't understand at all how Serif avoids criticism and solutions, as the issue is genuinely significant and affects a lot of people. Moreover, I can't fathom the reasoning behind the utterly Satan-black interface in v2. Firstly, it's far too dark; on top of that, the contrast ratio between background, text, and elements is far too weak, and fundamentally, it's much too dark in relation to the recommendations for neutral environments and interfaces for graphic designers and photographers.
I've tried to save myself through the preferences, but it doesn't fix all the issues:
 

There's no one in this thread who gave Serif a hard time or anything close to it. It's been quite normal communication between customer and company. At least by adult standards.
Serif has a wonderfully civilised approach to its forum where a lot is tolerated and recognised as legitimate feedback or criticism. In my many years as a passive observer and now active participant, I've barely seen any Serif staff write anything sensitive or moderate regular human communication and criticism. The overly sensitive reactions have almost exclusively come from customers who must live a sheltered life in a panic room at home with soft walls. The world has become a strange place where evolution, as Ricky Gervais rightly observes, has resulted in this strong human race ultimately... being afraid of... words.
If one spends a little less time in protected environments like online forums, and more at workplaces, in face to face debates between genuinely disagreeing individuals, and especially against the ultimate opponent, a confident mother-in-law, they would probably be a bit more resilient.
So, thank you to Serif for a high and mature standard.

Thanks @retrograde
I know about it. I think it's functionality that was added not long ago so that impact can be handled with bicycle patching gear when an accident has happened, and as useful in other contexts of course.
So Serif, it would be so helpful if you could set the default in a predictable and central location so that the accident never happens. 🙂

Yes, I could figure that out, and it's interesting enough to follow, but for other customers, there are serious priorities that come first. My clients don't hire me to have a hobby to look forward to. There's no honor or professionalism in laying the tracks while the train is moving, but I am fully aware that Serif might need to fix the problem I am currently experiencing by changing more fundamental code in Affinity.

Now I'm depressed. I struggle with and curse this bug every single day on the fast iPad Pro 2022 M2, and never imagined you didn't fix the problem in a subsequent 2.2.x fix.
I can't, may not, and won't use beta software for production work, so I'm going to be waiting months for a fix I don't know is coming, which is also frustrating.