thomaso

Isn't every bug working as designed until it becomes redesigned? What makes a bug-design become redesigned? For instance: 1. you are lying. 2. you are designed to lie. 3. so as not to lie you do what?

On PDF export from a 16 bit .afpub lot of data garbage is generated with useless huge file size. Try yourself - or read more: https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/topic/73410-pdf-export-huge-files/&do=findComment&comment=389874

What about the middle as usual and common to solve this easily? As you already wrote previously, this current Affinity-problem consists of distinguishing between current and active. For what purpose, except for extraordinary rarities? Momentarily APub tries to define "recent" equal to "current". In practice there is no such difference between active and current. Your screenshot says you expect the current page to be visible in it somewhere. Agree. But APub behaves differently: in APub's understanding, you can see pages 1 - 20 in main window, but page 327 as "current" just because you last worked on it. May be hours ago. Not current any more at all. – That is the bug.

Customers will like to save their custom application settings into recognizable and movable/copyable/savable files. – Just to load them when needed. For instance one file each for ... • keyboard shortcuts • color swatches • studio/panel settings (for 1 & for 2 monitors) • export/print presets • document presets • text styles ... etc. At the moment it looks rather strange – at least in macOS, where they are distributed in two folders with non-transparent content: It will support users to know a filename when saving a custom setting. For instance a custom color palette. Where is mine in the screenshots above?

I don't see a need for this in this matter. But me is not the Topic Opener. I prefer to change default shortcuts only if they are really useful or necessary – to stay compatible when hopping the computer. For example, in each version of InDesign, I alter the shortcut for "paste at original position" into cmd-V - compared to ID's default option-shift-cmd-V. – Fortunately not required in APub (though it does not allow me to simply carry my app-preferences with me, like InDesign enables me to do by its obvious and known preference file names.)

They do. But on a macbook (or any laptop?), the keyboard is slim and has no page-up/down-keys:

Is a current page indeed a current page – or a recently worked instead?

Thanks to @fde101 ! After all, this topic is a matter of syntax and semantics: Whereas "current page" is a fix and common term in UI and programming, APublisher seems to redefine its meaning. "A rose is a rose is a rose" might be a known expression, verbally and visually. But it is not for the APubs export options. "Current page" conventionally, usually, commonly describes the currently displayed page. For instance ...: Instance Property currentPage The page currently displayed by the image representation. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/appkit/nspdfimagerep/1528846-currentpage Instance Property currentPage Returns the current page number being printed. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/appkit/nsprintoperation/1534881-currentpage So it appears to be a bug of kind-of misusing words which confuses.

The idea behind is ... to learn? As a macbook user me was not given yet your ability to move pages with ctrl- or cmd-key + arrow key within APub. So I agree to this wish and feel jealous. Until it gets solved I simply swipe instead type to move pages around. And wonder why, too, of cause.

oilfried, (€lfr€d?), such is even easier accessible in German and Arabic: there you can just write a text without any vocals, but it remains understandable. Whereby Arabic is used to it every day (unlike German): there it is very common not to write any vocals at all (which would only occure as tiny strokes above consonants). Things to do: audible margin alignment ... ? [ or slim optical alignment: without the need for "e" as in https://archive.org/details/Gadsby/page/n17 ]

I experience the Pages range option as grayed-out, disabled and not click-able. The page range option occurs in 3 different ways: • grayed-out • white • selected When it is grayed-out I have no access to the Pages text field. A bug. Sometimes the window opens with this text field in white or even pre-selected: Unfortunately I can't tell how to reproduce the grayed-out state. But it occurs occasionally, again and again. A workaround is to switch "All Spreads" into "All Pages" to make the text field accessible. Sometimes it opens with my previous page range entry. Sometimes it does not. Sometimes it does but is grayed-out. Confusing UI bug.

“AFFNTY” – good point! But for both positions, since it includes "time" in this way of reading. Perfect, so-to-say, prfct. p.s.: who is "we" in you? May i get more info from Oval about those, who might been involved in this:

Mehr Beobachtung als Einstellung im Sinn von Haltung oder Meinung. Wie beim Klima. Relative "Full-baked": some users (and/or stakeholder) like it medium, some prefer it bloody. Detailed versus quick'n'dirty. Rich or poor. Look, what InDesign had offered in its first days & $: http://web.archive.org/web/20000510205719/http://www.adobe.com:80/store/products/indesign.html "Nur weil man sich scheut" klingt weit aus dem Fenster gelehnt – wegen "nur". Der Kostendruck (= Konkurrenz) ist heute ein anderer als vor z.B. 20 Jahren. Das Miet-Modell ist ein Indikator dafür, dass eine Software-Schmiede schon alles getan hat, wozu sie Kapazitäten hat. Bei Serif kann man noch kaufen – statt mieten. Freu' dich, solange es so ist.

@Jon P, glad to read from you, especially with good news! – May I add one possibly related point?: 1. Weeks ago the default color slider appeared to be RGB always – even in CMYK documents. 2. Now it appears that my recent choice of slider's color space is saved in my app prefs. – Much better! 1 + 2 = 3: Wouldn't it even be best if the default color sliders color space would switch according to the working documents color space?

I see the problem here, too. Though it looks a little different but even more obvious than for rllawrencejr : I get the full list of paper sizes - my custom sizes included but unfortunately grayed out and inaccessible: APub v206 : custom page sizes grayed-out and not accessible: Compare: page size option as expected, for instance working well in a text editor app:

That you bounce between the meanings of kerning and optical alignment arbitrarily – by using one argument of one as an argument for the other – makes it hard to follow your idea and to communicate with you. Hm? Bezieht sich das auf APublisher? Welche Behauptung? APub bietet für "Optical Alignment" drei Möglichkeiten an. Bei keiner erledigt das Programm die Aufgabe oder behauptet es zu tun, sondern setzt lediglich Vorgaben des Anwenders bzw. der Font-Datei um. ("Manual" oder "Font"). Jedenfalls findet beim Wechsel von "None" zu "Font" ein deutlicher Ausgleich statt. Ob schön, gut oder richtig ist eine andere Frage, die zu diskutieren aber hier keinen Sinn hat, da sich das Programm offenbar weniger an anspruchsvolle Typographen richtet, sondern eher einen Massenmarkt zu erzielen scheint. Mikro-Typographie wie der optische Randausgleich würden nur von einem Bruchteil der Anwender verstanden und von Lesern der Endprodukte kaum wahrgenommen werden, in Anbetracht der zunehmenden Menge an schlampig–hastigen Onlinemedien. Ich stimme dir zu, dass die Entwicklung zu bedauern ist – aber sie ist vollzogen und erstmal unumkehrbar. Vieles wird heute gar nicht mehr unterrichtet. Trotzdem macht es auch mir Vergnügen, in die Lehr- und Bilderbücher eines Albert Kapr einzutauchen, und das Wissen anzuwenden, wo Zeit und Geld es erlauben.

Again and again: Spacing within words is NOT what you call "optical margin alignment". Heute sind "setzen", "Satz" und "Setzer" obsolet in ihrem ursprünglichen Sinn. An deren Stelle ist bezüglich Buchstabenabstände das digitale Kerning getreten, das vom Font-Designer in die font-files integriert wird. Schon im Bleisatz waren "Kegel" und "Fleisch" vom type-designer vorgegebene Größen ("beard", "bevelled feet", "shoulder" – dependent to the source of text), die durch den Setzer nur erweitert, nie verringert werden konnten. Daraus entstand z.B. der sogenannte "gesperrte" Satz, der oft als Beleidigung fürs typograhische Auge des Schriftgestalters galt. Today, the german "setzen", "Satz" and "Setzer" are in their own sense. In their place, the digital kerning has stepped in terms of letter spacing, which is integrated by the Font Designer into the font files. Even in lead type-set, "Kegel" and "Fleisch" of the type designer were predetermined sizes (comp. "beard", "beveled feet", "shoulder" - depending on the text source), which are only augmented by the typesetter, never diminished. From this emerged the so-called "gesperrte" type setting, which was considered an insult to the typographical eye of the typeface designer. You talk about no. 3 in the following pic: Play around with a physical typewriter + so called monospaced fonts to get closer to this topic.

Your example does not show an optical alignment, as it is called in layout applications. Instead, the kerning of the font type is illustrated. This is defined in the font file. Some fonts contain more sophisticated kerning than other fonts, good kerning is a matter of font quality. The layout application user may change the character spacing, but uses the kerning options, not the optical alignment. The optical alignment, or optical MARGIN alignment, as you call it, only applies to the left or right margin, the edges of lines of text (which you don't show in your example). The optical alignment does effect only the first letter of a line and has no effect to the characters spacing within words. You can see that it works when you switch between different fonts. Serif typefaces often show bigger effects. Here is a sample with 3 different fonts; Optical alignment: left: "None", right: "Font". See some glyphs vary their position and are moving out of the text frame (grey):

There, imho, you express a massive misunderstanding about software development and its marketing. Before software will go public with a beta version there were many thoughts and researches for needs and chances. These result in concepts + decisions for features, followed by concepts + layouts for navigation and interface. Then programing starts as the latest part. The beta mainly is necessary to check this last part, the code. That's why beta so-to-say yearns for bugs: Only if all major bugs got eliminated it appears useful to sell the software. Since feature decisions are made already in a quite early concept phase it comes that feature requests are less important for the beta – but much more for any later release. In a public, commercial software it would be deadly if all features were implemented in its first release and same if it would be very buggy. In that way such a software is never finished – just to make sure clients will find reasons to buy upgrades. In particular, for your InDesign comparison, you'll be amazed at how much effort Adobe is making to get feature requests that can be integrated into future releases so as not to lose existing customers as buyers. Just do a search for "indesign Feature Request" ... and wonder how many sites and results are displayed.

Not if you follow Fixx's hint to set your document to facing pages. This way it turns from left/right to inner/outer. Regardless of a facing pages document setting you may export as single pages.

Perfect! No. It is available in "Document Setup..." In menu "File" at any time of your work process, – and in menu bar, with no object selected. For Export make shure to select pages, not spreads. This way you'll get single pages with 0 bleed in spine edges.

Any reason not mention this in your list of your experienced bugs? Black text in 100% K as an applications default. What did prevent to solve it simply by changing the color swatch definition of the affected text styles?

It helps to save time and effort to do a research before beta testing + requesting and demanding up to complaining. Here is just one offer of various overviews, comparisons, tests - this includes PP: https://strawpoll.de/layout-software

You can apply 4 bleeds – different for each edge of your document.

Obviously bleed is a document property, none of pages. So it is not possible. I see various workarounds but I'd contact the printer first to hear the aim for that bleed request. May be you can fulfill the request in a different way, or even convince him that you know what to do and deliver your file with usual bleeds. Technically I can't imagine any use in the request for single pages + different bleeds: • either it gets printed on a paper in same size like the result, then there is no need for bleed at all. • or it gets printed on a larger sheet, so it has to get cut anyway. The contact and information from printer might help to choose a workaround method: a.) Export a PDF with bleed and crop the unwanted bleed afterwards in Acrobat, which enables you to crop on even/odd pages only. b.) Increase the page size with the requested bleed. Use 2 master pages with different margins. c.) 1. Export 2 PDFs: one with all even pages only and bleed to the right, the other with odd and bleed left only. 2. Merge these 2 PDFs to 1 and rearrange the pages.