MikeW

If Quark can import this table correctly, Serif can with a bit more effort/time. I hardly use tables, much less connecting to Excel spreadsheets (so that update are displayed in Q, but one can bring them in as static tables too). I generally, if the data works for it, bring in as tab delimited as Old Bruce mentions and format with paragraph styles--unless I absolutely need tables. For now, I think until this is fixed, the copy/paste as text to a new sheet is the best way around the issue.

You need to uncheck the Use Advanced features or some such setting when you click on the More button. That setting is near the bottom of the dialog box. Then CD will open the pdf.

Here, using Excel or LibreCalc, it displays as Anto wants, whether I save the file or not. Here, it shows as a custom format. Screenshot is from Excel. If the issue is that APub cannot deal with custom formatting expressions, that needs changed.

Nice drawing! I can't help you with your question, just wanted to say I like it.

I was referring to the Spider...but the older I get, well, the sleeping on holidays works too!

Perfect for the upcoming holiday!

@PaoloT for one: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/174290-add-markdown-file-support/#comment-1132783 I was, had been, trying to convey that really isn't going to happen no matter the MD format/extension...hence asking Paolo if html5 export would suffice.

Yes, but isn't it equally obvious that no current flavor of MD supports APub's current capabilities, much less future capabilities. Meaning, it's one thing to support the simplistic CommonMark MD format coming in...but once "fleshed out" in APub it seems silly to then export it back out in that format as there could/would be significant loss (at least representational loss). For instance, even if APub went beyond CommonMark and supported some flavor of imported MD tables, once in APub, cells combined, etc., export to MD would be quite a mess. Which is why I suggested html5 as a viable representational output. Anyway, I doubt I'll see significant use of MD before I (really) retire as regards needing to do something other than the conversion to tagged text that I currently do.

If CommonMark support is added, I think that people will want various extensions supported too. It's pretty bare bones. That is pretty much the format I receive and turn into tagged text. For output, would html5 suffice? It has the ability to present what APub can accomplish and more. If html5 can then be converted into other formats, it would be good, yes?

btw, I started to receive very simplistic MD from one publisher a few years ago. There are, at this point, only 16 formatting-related attributes. I just keep adding conversion strings to a JS in my text editor to convert the text to QXP (well, Em Software's flavor) tagged text. That in turn is imported to a template and is formatted, with the exception of tables. Those are stripped of the MD and tabs added. Presentational attributes are done directly in QXP via converting the tabbed text to a table, then a table style applied. So this topic does have relevance, despite my ignorance of the various MD "languages" and/or their extended varieties.

Ok. Thanks for that. So is there a universal WYSIWYG authoring application, at least in the sense of Mac/PC, that supports classes et al that you are demonstrating? Or are you proposing Serif handle the half million flavors of MD and or their extensions for both import and export?

There would need to have a means for style mapping even if one was really strict about style naming when authoring in APub first. Just because the ideal workflow is MD first doesn't mean it is going to happen. We need style mapping anyway for importing from Word, too. Tables would be a challenge to represent all one can do in a layout application going into MD.

This issue goes back quite a ways: If I recall, there was at least one thread prior. Serif's reasoning is flawed there--and just about everywhere else when justifying DPI versus PPI--but it's not like we all don't understand what is meant whenever we read DPI. I tried to support the change in multiple threads...but it's now a Meh!

Just because that's what Serif decided to name the field. I wouldn't expect it to change to proper terminology anytime soon.

In your screen shot, there is a checkbox for Space between same styles. Check it, keep it at 0 (zero) and that 2pt above will only be applied to the paragraph before the bullets.

I think the concept terminology similarity between APub and ID and especially QXP is misleading simply because image handling is different between them. At least with a blank "frame." For instance, in QXP one can draw out an explicit image box (box is QXP's terminology, whether for text, image or "none") however, it can be a text box too. Same with an empty text box--it can solely hold an image instead of placing text. ID's and QXP's image frames/boxes are more akin to APub's empty text frames as regards the look on the surface than APub's explicit two-tool system for images (Picture Frame tools--rectangular/oval, and or the explicit Place image tool that is/isn't a Picture Frame). ID and QXP have an equally useful ability to manipulate a placed image as APub's Picture Frame tool in a single box/frame concept without the need to convert an image that has used to Place Image tool--i.e. no need to Convert to Picture Frame.

The manner in which QXP has handled this for eons is via a dialog box accessed from the Edit menu. If one selects multiple styles that are being used, the user is asked whether to replace them. Replaced with None results in keeping appearance via overrides. Else the p.styles/c.styles are replaced with the user chosen styles. But yeah, APub should have had a replace dialog from the start. Would have made such things so much easier for people from the start, whether dealing with placing a Word file or post placing.

Sure. I have thoughts about Word and its line spacing versus a layout application. But I'll let Dov Isaacs from Adobe (principal pdf architect) say it. All that to say, they (ID, QXP, APub, VD, etc.,) are best when using traditional measurements based upon point size to affect line spacing (font metrics also play a part in the visual representations of those numbers), versus MS Word. However, just Like Word, APub also seems to have the same inter-line measurement system on the surface--Multiples. But what the metrics are for those calculations are different and so yield deferring visual results. Other layout applications may represent a closer approximation to Word (or not) with their respective means of representing Word's Multiples option. Just a note. This, and other reasons are why someone like myself that does layout for a living stresses to new clients not to try and make the word processor version "pretty." Just make sure the words are as one wants them to be (or at least as close as possible to cut down on those pesky revisions). It's the job of the layout person to make the page read correctly (air to breathe but not too loose for the subject; as few "rivers" as possible; widows, orphans and runts dealt with; etc. That you, it seems, are wearing both hats really doesn't matter. Get the words right in Word, layout those words to satisfy your eye in APub. Best regards, Mike

It is a nice piece. I especially like the logo and the coloring under the Cape--nice gradient.

Nicely done. Question. What Affinity application did you also use?

That's true. However, that's the beauty of .idml that the features that are not supported are gracefully ignored. In another thread, I demonstrated such a thing in three non-Adobe applications. One had the same capability (e.g., highlighting text via custom underlines) and two did not, instead used what they could to represent this effect (using a regular underline) and in both those applications, one had the ability to create the effect using what APub calls Decorations--which newer versions of ID can also do. The custom underline was the only means of text highlighting in ID for years and years. Eh, Adobe has never claimed this capability. Just that, for instance, ID can place AI & PS files (and in the case of .psd files, hide/show various layers as QXP can also do). As far as I know, only Serif applications are designed to have the same file format that makes interchangeability even possible.

You have far more patience than I do.

Yes...Serif ought to just offer a dialog to use existing styles or replace existing styles and "forgot" to program in a map styles dialog for when importing text files into existing documents.

Yes, but it isn't quite the same. Styles in VP v5 would automatically be updated if changed when opening subsequent chapters, for instance. Yes, if using a book file they can be synchronized in APub. But still, the VP method was still quicker and didn't require remembering to import this and that. Much less also remembering to update the template version.

That's one of the features that Ventura Publisher had up through v5--when Corel got a hold of it and made the stylesheets always in-publication.