thomaso

(Aside the differences mentioned before): The layer hierarchy in APub works different and affects Master Page objects + ID's Global Layers. Global Layers are converted to not-global layers on every spread in APub. Thus also global layers of Master Pages get converted to several, individual layers of type: "(Layer)" on each document page in APub. In APub master page layers get placed as separate layers of type "Master" by default at the bottom of the layer hierarchy while global layers may get duplicated, one representing the master, another the document pages. This may alter your ID layout visually and also requires a different workflow when continuing in APub. – Compare below the different appearance of the blue rectangle: The position of its layer "global 1" at the bottom of ID layers on master & across the entire document gets split/copied in APub into a bottom layer within the master + a separate layer outside and above the master.

I needed three trials to get this .afpub opened. The first two times it showed a message dialog like "Access to the file was lost while performing the initial loading. The document must be closed now." I wonder what was causing this, all is saved on 1 internal SSD, no external disk or cloud in use. Interesting, same result to me with this .afpub on my non-M1/M2 mac. Although I never experienced this (often reported) file size increase before, now it is maintained with this document and I can not fix it with a simple Save As. If I go fully back in the document's history and Save As it results in 986 MB, although the page content would not require this. This seems to mean that this bug not only happens on a specific hardware but, once it happened, also continues on a different mac. Also, a new document + the option "Add from file…" results in 986 MB if saved, which seems to indicate the data rubbish gets added, too.

A workaround could use an invisible style + a copy of the numbered/bulleted list left aligned. For instance: 1. The list is active but has an invisible style assigned: 2. A copied frame, set to left-align, shows only the list characters in a desired style while now the text has no colour and thus does not appear. 3. Feel free to remove the text via Find & Replace if the frame width or the hidden text content disturbs your workflow.

This option occurs only with a right-click on the object in the layout window, not in the Layers panel nor in the main menu. Just note, accordingly it always converts to a rectangular shaped image only / thus a stroke will get applied to the rectangular bounding box.

Hi @MerrySherry, Welcome to the Affinity Forums! What value do you want to adjust and how do you check the result? For instance in the Transform Panel you can work with decimals of percentage, regardless what result is displayed in the field. In the app prefrences you may set to get up to 6 decimals displayed, and you may alter the displayed unit to make a tiny change more obvious.

You can use an additional object + layer nesting to enable the wanted workflow and result. This way strokes can get visually applied to pixel content, too. Also, converting a layer of type "pixel" to an "image" layer might help.

You can achieve both – no additional pixels & no rounded, blurred corners – by placing the Outline Effect inside.

Thank you! (for your monitoring, this post contains another example: the link should show at least two search results, currently it shows only the newer V2 post) Are the search results relative – or did the new structure alter the URL for old threads? In case of the latter any link within the former V1 forum posts would not work any more, right? While I agree to the plan to have all Questions in 1 forum (with old V1 threads auto-moved to the end just by their dates), currently I do see a link to "Pre V2" as a sub-forum on top of the Questions forum (click pic to enlarge): … which obviously still gets used (fine so far) and obviously not only for V1 questions (possibly confusing). So, I don't understand you (and @loukash) mentioning "not split" respectively "granulation isn't" because I do see the split. This split appears problematic especially if users do a search for possibly existing thread, reply to one of this subforum (archive) while their post will not occur in the list of the main Questions forum but "hidden" in this Pre-V2 archive (which displays only 1 newest reply, here Walt's, 19 min ago).

Correction: I just found the newly created set of V1 Beta Archive forums … https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/135-archive-reports-from-affinity-version-1-betas/ … so they seem "just" to be currently not accessible for the forums search.

Currently it rather appears the V1 Beta threads not only are invisible but now are excluded from the search, too: The link in my post above now shows only 1 result (this current thread) while the initial result (as screenshot above) does not appear any more. (same result in a different browser / not logged-in). – Regardless of being beta or not those threads my help to communicate about bugs that still occur (in V1 or V2) by possibly reducing the need to repeat tests, screenshots and words. I agree these threads should be set to read-only. I even would appreciate the current V1 bug forum to be read-only, too, just to avoid the impression any possible V1 update might get these old bugs fixed. Since we are there: Currently this Support & Questions forum contains V1 and V2 questions – while additionally a separate Q&A Archive exists for V1 only, which doubles the number of V1 forums and thus may confuse, in worst case for instance if a former V1 thread of the Archive gets used for a reply concerning V2. – I wonder why V1 does not have an entirely separate forum, not as subforum of V2?

Serif has not 😉 … if I understand this correctly (and did not miss a newer info): Concerning Type 1 fonts there was this comment in 2020 and that in 2021, not really indicating an end of Type 1 in Affinity, let alone a date:

I've never experienced crashes caused in particular by Metal/hardware acceleration, so I thought it was mainly affecting the newer M1 Macs / Apple chips... whereas it seems odd that these are still getting the problems, since V2 has been recoded to avoid these problems on these configurations.

Affinity has known problems with Postscript Type 1 fonts. For my Univers I see an empty Affinity Glyph Browser, too, as for other postscript fonts, e.g. Meta, Rotis, The Sans etc. https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/search/&q=postscript glyph browser&quick=1

This bug affects Windows only, right? Whereas the OP (and you) appear to be macOS users. In my impression it is more buggy than V1. In the first month I was surprised about the fast growing number of bug reports for V2. I assume the number of bugs in V2 is larger than in V1 because of the fact that most long lasting bugs from V1 were not fixed before V2 got newly coded – in the sake of more stability / compatibility with newer operating systems / hardware (and leaving older behind) – which means theses V1 bugs got rewritten for V2. Some weeks after V2 release I added occasionally certain reported bugs to a personal list of interest to make up my mind about the V2 usability for my preferred workflows. Unfortunately the list of V1 bugs carried over to V2 is longer than those bugs which appear for V2 only. (while some of the V2 bugs even affect old features which were bug-free in V1). Since my operating system is not supported by V2 I judge only from my forum impressions. For some weeks I considered to create a separate boot volume especially for V2 usage to be able to try the demo at least but the continuously growing number of V2 bugs stopped this idea before it got realised.

Okay, you used a 2nd decoration where I used a character background colour. It appears I was mislead by your scaling-handle hint, which becomes irrelevant here if you activate "Scale with object" in the Stroke panel for the decoration.