PaoloT

I dunno, but I found the bonus templates very instructive. Very good modern design, in my view. Paolo

This is exactly my situation. Photoshop happily replaced, Illustrator for most, but not all the tasks, due to issues in data exchange between Illustrator and Designer. And InDesign still in full use, since Publisher is not yet there for most of my tasks. I've used Publisher for some shorter projects, and it was very nice. Now, if someone asks me for an IDML file they want to reuse in InDesign, or a version of the works in an RTL language… Paolo

Will this change anything? Knowing their goals will not make you able to use the perspective features in the current version of the program. And if the schedule will change (as is typical with all products, from a new bench in your block to the launch of a spacecraft), you will still not be able to use the features you were hoping to use. If you depend on bidirectional IDML exchange, it would be very wrong to start your project hoping it will arrive. Maybe it will, maybe not. Even if someone at Serif told us that they hope to include it. The right thing to do is to use the tools that are available now. Paolo

As far as I know, IDML is a set of XML files. So, if you will no longer to open the full set, you will at least recover most of the data. Paolo

I see some benefits: - They would be there, ready when you create a new document. - With the workbooks, Serif has shown that they have great designers to help making them. The disadvantages: - Everything will start to smell "factory templates" very soon. Paolo

It is, in fact, one of the ost useless sites around. There are no reviews, but just useless comparisons of raw numbers, without any real relation. Templates are nice, and it would be a good thing if Serif increases the number of templates shipped with Publisher. But if one needs a template, why not looking around for the tons of templates available in Idml? The number of creatives offering them in AfPub format is also quickly increasing. Paolo

Isn't this already possible in the Decorations pane? You can adjust the extension of the background all four sides, and tie this offset to various details of the character. Paolo

Just a short note to warn once again that InDesign is not able to generate, on its own, a perfectly accessible PDF file. Further editing with Adobe Acrobat (Pro) is required. When checking in Acrobat 2020 a file generated from InDesign, I get the attached report. Some of the missing features are to be added in Acrobat; some others require manual processing. It would obviously be highly desirable if Publisher 2 included the features requiring Acrobat in an InDesign-based workflow. Let's hope this is possible… Paolo

I'll add Apple Pages among the apps that can make equations. Paolo

It's not a matter of processing Serif for not including this type of compatibility. It's just a matter of understanding if the Affinity suite can generate output that can be printed at the available printer shops. I don't have a statistic on how many shops around the world are limiting compatibility to the older format, but as you say it might be a very common issue in some countries. I know that in my country (not under embargo and among the most industrially developed ones) this can be an issue, even if maybe just one consisting in the bad mood from the shop owner. As of now, I've always used InDesign, and this has never been an issue for me. In some other countries, maybe this is preventing the use of the Affinity suite for any work having to be printed. I don't know, and can just record the experience of other forum members. Being the supplier of the PDF export technology based in Germany, I would guess that they are not even allowed to sell non-inclusive technologies, so I guess this can't be solved in any foreseeable way (unless going for workarounds). My suggestion is to make pressure on the printer shops to update their technology. If it is just a matter of inertia, it's time they know a new, smarter set of tools is arriving, and their shop might be proven inadequate for the current times. Paolo

On the Mac, you do it at system level, and access these collections of colors from the Affinity apps. Paolo

PDF/X1a-2003 is based on the specifications of PDF1.4, that include tags. PDF/X1a-2001 was based on PDF1.3, lacking tags, and therefore not accessible. Paolo

As a workaround: LibreOffice can save in DOCX file format. So, the original ODT file can easily be converted to DOCX (in theory, without losing much of its features, being both totally or partly compatible with the ODF specifications). Paolo

I’ve done some research, and I have sadly to confirm that also in Italy PDF/X1a-2001 is the commonly requested format. The printer I use most often says that there isn't a particular reason, other than it is tried and tested, works fine, and there is no need to retrain the team to deal with something that might only be marginally better to them. If I understand correctly, this format is deprecated, due to the lack of accessibility. This was fixed with PDF 1.4, that introduced tags. I guess this feature, fundamental for onscreen reading, is completely irrelevant during prepress. Paolo

I'm recurrently tempted by LaTeX. But then, every book I see made with it smells of school textbook. So, I end up declining. Paolo

If the problem is finding a command, the fastest way to find it is to add a Search command working on the UI. On the Mac, this is a native feature, and works perfectly fine in the Affinity apps. Paolo

NO. PLEASE, NO!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! Leave braindead UIs conceived for repetitive office tasks to office tasks. Use the old, familiar metaphor of floating palettes with creative tasks. Paolo

The community is fine. Some members, in particular if specialized in trolling, can find an excellent place in the Ignore list. Paolo

And it's surprising how advanced professionals like you are still here to waste their time!

Having a way to break down a project will be a very important step to allow collaboration. The elements contributing to a shared workflow would be: - Splitting the project between modules (a book section), as atomic as possible (down to an 'H4' level). - An effective way of managing and navigating through the building blocks (sort of an interactive ToC). - Dynamic linking of texts in an AfPub document. - Dynamic linking of images in an AfPub document. - Preflighting/checking of error and coherence between all building blocks. - Propagation of properties (color tables, text styles…) to all the building block. This should make for an effective collaboration between writer, translators, page artists, illustrators, drawing artists, and the project manager. Paolo

Somewhere else I tried to stress the importance of collaborative work on a publishing project. I may have used the work on software development or on a video project as an example, with the concept of a manager distributing the tasks to the other collaborators, and then accepting their contributions. This is very different from what you can do with Google Docs, where all the contributors are on a peer level, and can change everything at will. I could experience this can be a mess even with smaller documents; I can't even imagine what it can be when working on something like a magazine. A software that can be used in a small publishing house seems to me to be missing. I guess the bigger publishers use their own software, but what about smaller ones? At the same time, I have to ask myself one more time what the future of publishing will be. Most of the "magazines" and "newsletters" I see are now published online as web pages (if not as Instagram posts…). So, I wonder if it is a savvy idea to make Publisher something to be exclusively used in a context similar to the one in which InDesign was first developed, or it should as soon as possible become a publishing tool aware of the current times. Paolo

But what has this to do with page layout, in particular? We all know what online collaboration on shared documents mean, if we have worked in a team during the latest years. What I would like to understand is how and why collaboration on a shared document can be used on a page layout document. Paolo

While I’ve sometimes used the collaboration feature of Google Docs, when discussing of product specs and advertising texts, I wonder how collaborations could be used in page layout. Would you like to give some hints? Paolo

But they have disseminated the program with ambiguous signs…

I'm probably thinking in Adobe terms. InDesign calls "links" any object that is imported in a document. Publisher calls them "referenced files". Scrivener joins together whole RTF documents, that are bonded together. There is no import/linking/referencing in this case. Paolo