Bit Dissapointed

This is an unacceptable workflow for graphic design or really any professional work. I think we can all agree that in order to do any professional work we need our apps to move at the speed of our knowledge, experience, and imagination.
That is why professionals use shortcuts, that is why professionals use non-destructive workflows, that is why they don't eyeball their design decisions everyday. Having to open a whole other app, work there on a blend (mind you I might have to import swatches, styles and other past design decisions I'd already made in order to see the live consequences of the blend on my design), copy my work from one app to another or even export it and reopen it. This is not a professional workflow.
Why on earth are there so many people on these threads going: „Affinity is fine the way it is. Affinity doesn't need to change. As long as it stays cheap and I can use my app forever they can go bankrupt for all I care.”
An agency that would offer Serif quite an investment for licenses for example would never work with this suite so long as it lacks: a blend tool, gradient meshes, true vector brushes.
You are bringing absolutely nothing to the table by replying: Oh just install these three other apps for features you use every day, than work in all your four apps at the same time for a single web asset.
Bring suggestions for improvement, bring ideas, bring helpful information.

These are two completely different types of user interface; one place you navigate by symbols (how the brain was actually designed to navigate), the other by words (opposite brain scenario). With words, it's much, much, much harder to decode such categorization unless it's directly obvious from the words: War Ammunition Milk Butter.
In any case it is common practice in other companies to user test this before releasing a thing to the public - even a beta - and Serif doesn't do this. So here we are.

I don't navigate the lists that way myself, but by what I know for sure I'm looking for, the name. Code can easily sort such a list regardless of the selected language.
Assuming that people will want to see them listed in type order in this case, or will intuitively adjust to it, is naive. And if that is the case, one should clearly section with labes them so that it is apparent and the logic is visible. Apparent logic is great usability, apparent madness is just madness.
So I think what we're left with is apparent madness that appears as madness to anyone who hasn't rehearsed and memorized the types of layers in Affinity. That's probably the majority.
🙂

Alphabetically list order to eyes or navigate obvious exhausting sorted in any other is not your with it's this which logical.

(It's exhausting to navigate this list with your eyes, which is not sorted alphabetically or in any obvious other logical order.)

In yonder ring, where men of wit doth meet,
Their words in ceaseless gyres do twist and twine.
No fruit they bear, in endless parley sweet,
In labyrinth of speech, their fates entwine.
Forsooth, their tongues do weave a tapestry,
Of sound and fury, signifying naught.
In mirthful maze of fruitless repartee,
The precious sands of life, unheeded, caught.
In circles traced by time's relentless hand,
They drift in seas of barren discourse deep.
No port of purpose, nor no steadfast land,
In tempest of their idle talk, they weep.
O, wretched squander of the golden prime,
In vapid jest, they lose life's precious time.

That's not really a discrepancy. The find and replace panel treats \\ as a "special character". The states panel does not support any "special characters". So what you see is expected. 

I'm with @Peter Mican why complicate something, isn't the best policy to end up at the lowest common denominator, isn't it good to give people a way to work that suits their way of thinking. My brain doesn't automatically think that circle is two 180º arcs, I think it's a complete 360º circle.
+1 for a 360º dial that starts with 0 at the top. Be more amadine 

The panel does support 360 degrees to the extent that if you enter a value such as 270, it is converted to -90 for you.
It varies how programs handle angles in the transform panel. Amadine seems to be your friend, also allowing one to visually see or adjust the angle within a circle as well.

For amateur DTP (Desktop Publishing) users who might not see the value of a story editor, it's essential to understand the distinct advantages this tool offers, particularly for professional layout designers and editors. Here's a detailed explanation:
Focused Text Editing: A story editor provides a distraction-free environment for editing text. Unlike WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) interfaces, which present the layout and text simultaneously, a story editor isolates the text. This isolation is crucial for editors and layout designers who need to concentrate on the textual content without the distraction of layout elements. It allows for a deeper focus on language, grammar, and consistency.
Efficiency in Handling Multiple Text Sources: In publications like newspapers or magazines, texts come from various authors. Each author has their style and tone, which might not always align with the publication's style. A story editor allows editors to seamlessly integrate these varying styles into a uniform voice that fits the publication's standards. This task would be cumbersome and less efficient if done directly in a WYSIWYG layout program.
Advanced Text Manipulation Features: Story editors often have advanced features that are not available or are less accessible in standard text processors. These include tracking changes, version control, detailed find-and-replace functions, comments and annotations, and more sophisticated typography controls. These features are indispensable for professional editing.
Speed and Performance: Working with text in a story editor is generally faster than in a layout program. Layout programs are heavier and more resource-intensive because they have to render graphics, images, and various layout elements in real time. For large documents, this can lead to slower performance. In contrast, story editors are more lightweight and responsive, making them better suited for editing large amounts of text.
Precision in Text Layout: For publications that require a high level of precision in text layout (like technical or academic papers), story editors provide more control. This precision might include specific requirements for line breaks, spacing, indentation, and text alignment that are easier to manage in a text-centric environment.
Better Integration with Publishing Workflows: Professional publishing often involves a workflow where different stages (writing, editing, design) are clearly delineated. Story editors fit well into this workflow, providing a dedicated tool for the editing stage, which streamlines the overall process and ensures that each phase is completed with the appropriate tools and focus.
Enhanced Control Over Typography and Layout Elements: Story editors typically offer more nuanced control over typography than standard text editors or WYSIWYG layout programs. This control includes the adjustment of headings, bullet point styles, table formats, line spacing, and indentations. These typographic adjustments are crucial for ensuring that the document adheres to the desired style guide or publication standards.
Clear Identification and Correction of Formatting Errors: In a story editor, the typographic elements of a document are more prominently displayed and easier to navigate. This clarity allows editors to quickly identify and correct formatting errors. For instance, inconsistencies in heading levels or bullet point styles are more apparent, and editors can make adjustments without the distractions of other layout elements.
Streamlined Layout Adjustments: Story editors allow for streamlined adjustments to the layout elements of a text. This feature is particularly useful when dealing with complex documents that include multiple heading levels, lists, tables, and other structured elements. Editors can adjust these elements in a focused environment, ensuring that they meet the required standards before the text is moved to the layout phase.
Precision in Structured Content: Tables, lists, and other structured content often require precise alignment and formatting. Story editors provide the tools necessary to fine-tune these elements, ensuring that they are correctly formatted and visually appealing. This precision is especially important for publications that rely heavily on structured data, such as scientific reports, academic journals, or technical manuals.
Facilitates Consistency Across the Document: Maintaining consistency in the use of typographic elements across a document is essential for professional publications. Story editors make it easier to apply uniform styles for headings, subheadings, bullet points, and other text elements. This consistency enhances the readability and professional appearance of the final publication.
Error Detection and Resolution in a Focused Environment: Working in a story editor allows editors to focus solely on the textual and typographic aspects of a document, free from the distractions of full-page layouts. This focused environment is conducive to detecting and resolving errors, ensuring that the text is error-free and well-structured before it is integrated into the final layout.
In summary, while WYSIWYG programs and text processors are valuable tools, they cannot fully replace the functionality and efficiency offered by a dedicated story editor in a professional publishing environment. A story editor is tailored for the specific needs of text editing and preparation before layout, making it an essential tool in the arsenal of professional editors and layout designers.

It's always a risk with engineers behind software, but there are also good reasons for it for some illustrators and technical designers, and it's pretty much industry standard. It's just sad that there isn't an alternative for the many graphic designers who are completely independent of trigonomic notation and who should have a logical clockwise and 360 degree alternative that is more visual and that follows knowledge from the world. Like you.

The answer is math:
https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1834679/is-there-a-mathematical-reason-why-rotation-in-the-counterclockwise-direction-po
As a user says:
I guess the internet can discuss this a fortnight, but it's a bit sad that not many have made an alternative option for all graphic designers who have needs that don't lean directly on trigonometry and this notation. Amadine took a chance. I guess the company thought that their customer base understands 0-360 degrees better, and I don't think the developers behind Amadine are unfamiliar with trigonometry. 🙂 The company just chose differently. Have fun with the different notations and math:

The issue "Layer states > Add "Layer" container to Layer type list" (REF: AF-1762) has been fixed by the developers in internal build "2.4.0.2256".
This fix should soon be available as a customer beta and is planned for inclusion in the next customer release.
Customer beta builds are announced here and you can participate by following these instructions.
If you still experience this problem once you are using that build version (or later) please reply to this thread including @Serif Info Bot to notify us.

Nonsense, no clutter or aestheticians died from this small discrete icon in Windows 95 that somehow provided context-sensitive help throughout the program.

It's not my experience that customers read documentation in full, and that's the point I'm making. My experience with my stakeholders is that they typically don't read it because it's not absolutely at their fingertips, and then they see if they can't do without it anyway. It's very engineering-minded to refer to manuals at all. We need to move into more complex products before people start approaching it from that perspective. And a different type of customers than Serifs. This is not AutoCAD.
Regardless of what they should and shouldn't, I see no reason why computers of all things on earth should isolate people from easy access to digital context-sensitive help. Otherwise, online help hasn't moved a bit further since printed manuals.
And I personally find this discreet link to help more tolerable than the banal, clunky and graphical megatooltips that pop up in programs because people don't read manuals. At a fundamental level, I find the total separation of help and software, other than a menu item, quite awkward and outdated. Regardless of which program we are discussing.

Grant me a Euro for every 'I have absolutely no idea about what's happening internally at Serif, but I believe that...' post ordinary users have received from other ordinary users here, and I could buy a luxury yacht with a crew.
And let's just repeat for new readers: Developers develop code and architecture, while project managers and other decision-makers make decisions (ideally with usability specialists, which is not the case at Serif Software) about what and when to develop. The best role for developers here is to advise on the most feasible implementation order and what is technically possible or impossible. Had there been a leadership decision years ago to switch to a scalable interface instead of the strangely microscopic one we now have in v2.0, it might have been implemented by now. Possibly at the expense of new features, and therefore postponed. A classic scenario; milking an architecture to its last.
In that case, it would have been a strategic decision, implemented in the products by developers, with marketing and documentation following suit. Instead, another peculiar strategic decision was made to change the interface to the dark one we have now, with contrast issues, and still an interface that cannot adapt to current and upcoming screen sizes.
I don't understand why so many refer to developers as almost the sole factor in software development; it's such an oversimplified notion of a company, I can hardly fathom it. I have no idea why leadership at Serif makes both sound and obviously flawed decisions, and why glaring deficiencies are not addressed for years, but don't imagine for a moment that there's a circle of all-knowing, gracious developers with a ready explanation and solutions at hand for future updates.
Decisions are made by the head; not the tail!

Haha, don't get too close to the Saint Andrew's Cross!!

That version is incorrect. There should be a (white) gap between the hypotenuse of each blue triangle and the neighbouring red stripe.

Ironically, variations of The Union Jack has given Serif problems several times - at least the SVG files on Wikipedia.
The position ends in hyperspace - but you can bring the flag in where it belongs like this (see X Y values in the transform panel):

If you paste the SVG source code to clipboard and select new file from clipboard, you get a slightly more usable version where the flag is actually displayed in miniature and can be scaled up with a mouse:

 

Thanks for this awesome feature! Fits perfectly with my workflow. One issue that I noticed (Affinity Designer 2.4 beta on Windows):
When I set the filename (Document name) variable in a new and unsaved document, save the document (to give it a name) and than export my slice, the name of the exported file does not contain the filename.
Also if I have set up a document with the filename variable, then use Save As with a new document name and export my slice, the slices filename is not updated with the new document name.
The same applies to the path if the filename variable is used there. Closing and reopening the document resolves the issue.

Almost every time I need to save exported files in the same folder where the edited image is saved. If it would be possible to specify e.g. ".\" and the application would not ask for the folder, that would be good.

I would highly recommend to add File location in the path components. This would save a lot of time searching and going to the location where you want to export the files.
When working on more projects at once you constantly need to find the export location where you file is that you are working on.
 
I think the icons are odd/blury in the 2.0 version.  The icons need to be crispier like in Publisher. 
 
Thank you.

In professional contexts, it's now well recognised in my experience. There are several things to use it for, but the really positive thing about slug area is the simplicity and that the information reaches the right people in the right place at the right time. When the printer receives the file, they have all relevant instructions and information immediately available on the document itself, streamlining the process and reducing the risk of misunderstandings or errors.
When you collaborate with others on a regular basis and learn to include information you know they'll ask for, you're more likely to leave work on time, whistling and happy.

Could not have said it better myself.

In order for the object to be selected when the selection does not completely surround the object, you need to enable "Select object when intersects with the selection marquee", but note that this will select the object without fill as well. So that's not really what you're looking for.

And a side note for someone else.
Select object when intersects with the selection marquee" is a shortened form often seen in technical or instructional contexts, where some words may be omitted for brevity or simplicity. However, in standard written and spoken English, one would include "it" to make the sentence grammatically correct and clearer: "Select the object when it intersects with the selection marquee." Without "it," the sentence can appear incomplete or stylistically informal.

In professional contexts, it's now well recognised in my experience. There are several things to use it for, but the really positive thing about slug area is the simplicity and that the information reaches the right people in the right place at the right time. When the printer receives the file, they have all relevant instructions and information immediately available on the document itself, streamlining the process and reducing the risk of misunderstandings or errors.
When you collaborate with others on a regular basis and learn to include information you know they'll ask for, you're more likely to leave work on time, whistling and happy.

Hei @Polygonius
I assume you use the crop tool to quickly and visually extend the document size, creating a margin around the image, perhaps as a mat/passepartout. Note that in Photo, you can also do this, albeit more mechanically and traditionally, by using Document -> Resize Canvas.
Designer operates a bit differently with documents - not so much technically, but the user interface assumes you're working with objects and handles a document differently - less like pixels more like paper with objects. But inside in the machine room Designer and Photo are very much alike.
In Designer, you can't do it as in Photo, from what I know, but you can do it in a somewhat roundabout way that's oookay if you don't have to do it often:
Open file in Designer: Edit -> Edit in Photo (If your file is already open and in progress in Designer, save before continuing) In Photo 1/2: Use this crop function as you usually do in Photo In Photo 2/2: Edit -> Edit in Designer You're back, now with a mat/passepartout in the document 🙂