loukash

My guess is that it's "by design": If it were a toggle, and you would select multiple layers, some hidden and some shown, the it would reverse their respective state. Since it's a split shortcut, selecting layers with opposite states will either hide all selected, or show all selected.

… which is technically nothing else but the MacOS help system that is also located in /Applications/Affinity [XYZ].app/Contents/Resources/AffinityPhoto.help/Contents/Resources/[language version].lproj folder And my gut feeling is that the programming of these help files must follow certain rules in order to be compatible with the MacOS Help Viewer. Serif would thus possibly have to rewrite their online help if they wanted a different approach. For what it's worth, since the MacOS help viewer actually sucks, usually I view the help files locally via bookmarks to the above in the web browser…

… right-click on the TOC link in the left-hand column of the page and select "Copy Link Address" (or similar) from the context menu. It's been like this since the launch of https://affinity.help

My favorite feature of the Affinity suite is that it's not a monolithic bloated app with hundreds of panels, tools, and menu commands. (Yes, I'm looking at you, VectorStyler and Ill-Frustrator!) Focus is a virtue. Seamless switching between the three apps on the fly via StudioLink personas or File > Edit In… is the intended Affinity workflow. And I, for one, like it this way.

Apparently "by design". That has been confirmed in a similar context just recently:

Alternatively, you can also achieve the same if you select and place the "future" child layer(s) above the "future" parent layer and select Layer > Arrange > Move Inside.

If you want to clip the image with the ellipse, then what you're doing here is correct: drag the image thumbnail roughly slightly under the "Ellipse" name until you see that indented blue line, then let go. The ellipse doesn't even need a fill. In v1, the "sweet spot" where the blue line appears is sometimes hard to find. This behavior has been improved in Affinity v2. Vice versa, if you want to use a vector shape as a mask, you would drag the ellipse thumbnail over the image thumbnail until you see a vertical blue line. Sometimes, clipping and masking may return similar or even identical results, but other times each method has its own merits, depending on what you want to achieve next.

While that generally works, not all shortcuts will migrate (MacOS here). My guess is that it's "by design" so that only shortcuts that match the respective command and its menu position in both versions will be applied. It's a useful aid, but the rest will have to be added manually. Worked for me pretty fast by comparing the shortcuts preferences lists back and forth via app switching (cmd-tab) while both peferences windows were at the same position, hence seeing any differences visually: sort of comparing by "animation".

Yep, this is a Publisher feature, because its focus is page layout and typography. These feature distinctions are there by design.

It depends on what features you were using in ID. Standard stuff translates pretty well. Spreads with >2 pages will be merged. Effects like feathered edges won't work well or will be ignored. But even some stuff that's "officially" unavaliable in Publisher can actually work, like linked text on path:

For example like this:

It's in 1.10.6 as well. There are a few other workarounds without rasterizing: use Align Stroke Inside only Expand Stroke In case of the Outline Effect, even 1.999999 px width will fix it.

Another non-destructive possibilty is to group (blue) the Outer C donut objects (green) while making a copy of one donut (red), giving it a simple solid opaque stroke, and adjusting its width and angle and mask the blue group with it: If the export should be more "vector", then you may want to expand the stroke mask to regular curves so that the mask remains a vector curve. Otherwise masking with a stroke will rasterize.

Nope. Yep.

Example please!