fde101

We already have those - this is what master pages are for.
Global layers work together with master pages to control the Z order of elements on master pages: if you have two global layers, and put your per-spread content in the lower layer, then the content from the master page can be placed in the upper layer to appear above the per-spread content, or on the lower layer to appear below the per-spread content.
 
This is exactly what we are requesting global layers for - they provide that kind of grouping.  See the video I posted above.

You can even create the document in the Publisher persona.  Just make sure "Default master" is turned off and there is only one page, then you can drag out whatever artboards you want using the artboard tool in the Designer persona - they will replace the "page" that is present, as long as there is only one in the document (and no masters).

For those who are using non-Mac systems, this is what I get with a "normal" Mac program when I click on the title (in recent versions of MacOS):

 
From there, I can rename the document, add tags to it, move it (using "Where:"), or lock it to prevent changes.
 
 
This is what I get when I command+click on the title (and this has been around for a long time):

 
Selecting a folder from that menu navigates to that folder in the Finder.

I agree with @Ray S. that a LUT is the general solution for this as it covers more adjustments than simply curves and they can cross over between applications.  There are even applications out there now whose entire function is to generate LUTs that can then be used in other applications, and there are numerous sites with free and for-sale libraries of them.
The idea of having general support for export/import of adjustment settings is not a bad one, but if the idea is to build a library of looks that can be replicated across images, LUTs are simply a better solution for that.

There is no "right" place for new threads about this any more as it has been asked and answered numerous times before.  If you really feel a need to extend that conversation do it in one of the threads that already exist.
Also, why do we now have a thread which has the sole purpose of telling people that you created another thread?  That sounds like something the department of redundancy department might need to get involved with...

There is a "Bevel/Emboss" option in layer FX:
Create a normal art text object with the text and the font of your choice Select the text object Click the "fx" button on the Layers panel Select "Bevel/Emboss" and check the box next to it to enable the effect Set "Type" to Emboss" Reduce the "Fill Opacity" (at the bottom of the window) to 0% Adjust the radius and other parameters to taste

There are actually two hyphens in the SVG.
One hyphen is the soft hyphen (00AD).
The other hyphen is the hyphen-minus (002D).
Arial has both of those characters (code-points) mapped to the same glyph.
So Word is just showing what is actually there in the SVG.

Some fonts have no glyph there for soft hyphen (00AD), so nothing appears.
This some-have-it, some-do-not has to be handled by the applications.
Some applications display nothing for soft hyphen (00AD), even if there is a glyph in the font.
That would explain why QuarkXPress, and Inkscape show only one hyphen.
Affinity apps should not be including both of those different hyphens in the SVG.
So that is a bug.
May be technically "correct", but the result is bad.
Which is why other DTP apps, and browsers, do not show the 00AD.

This seems like a rather curious decision...

I personally think they should default the title and author fields to blank.

While I have nothing against support for higher bit depth CMYK support, I am a bit lost on its utility?
If manipulating photos, those start out in RGB (or RAW which gets converted to RGB) so better to manipulate them in RGB space before converting to CMYK for printing?
For other purposes, CMYK is generally a print format (for physical paper) and printers can't really render even the full tonal range of 8-bit per component CMYK color anyway, so the added range of CMYK would effectively be wasted, and many printers reject 16-bit CMYK files if they do happen to receive them.
 
Also, your reference to Corel Painter is rather curious, as it is strictly RGB when it comes to its painting tools (it can import/export CMYK but does not paint in CMYK internally).  If you are looking at it purely from a color depth perspective, Photo is already superior to Painter in this regard, as it supports 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit RGB, 8-bit CMYK, and more...

You can use Command + Shift + 3 to capture the entire screen, including the pointer, which does get the correct pointer.  Then crop the resulting image as needed.

This was discussed at length before they switched to these square icons, back when they had much better ones in a previous version.  Some users actually liked the new ones (there are some really strange people out there), others hate them, personally I think they are tolerable but pale compared to how good the old ones looked.  To me they look ugly mainly because I remember how good the old ones were.  I would love to see Serif go back to using the previous icons, but they seem to be trying to work within some imaginary constraints that require them to be square for some reason.
 
I think it has something to do with Apple's requirements for icons on the iPad versions and the desire to be consistent across the platforms (which is clearly misguided as Apple specifically wanted the iPad icons to be differentiated from the ones on macOS...  whatever).

If you think that web browsers only support things that are easy to implement, you need a serious reality check.
That said, I get the impression that this particular omission has more to do with priorities than with complexity.
While I too would like to see strong support for color and variable fonts, there are many other things missing from the Affinity apps which I would agree should have a much higher priority at the moment - footnotes/endnotes, global layers, cross-references, more vector manipulations, a dog tool...  just to name a few.

This.  Dogs are currently underrepresented in the Serif products, so just trying to be more fair.  😎

While I have nothing against support for higher bit depth CMYK support, I am a bit lost on its utility?
If manipulating photos, those start out in RGB (or RAW which gets converted to RGB) so better to manipulate them in RGB space before converting to CMYK for printing?
For other purposes, CMYK is generally a print format (for physical paper) and printers can't really render even the full tonal range of 8-bit per component CMYK color anyway, so the added range of CMYK would effectively be wasted, and many printers reject 16-bit CMYK files if they do happen to receive them.
 
Also, your reference to Corel Painter is rather curious, as it is strictly RGB when it comes to its painting tools (it can import/export CMYK but does not paint in CMYK internally).  If you are looking at it purely from a color depth perspective, Photo is already superior to Painter in this regard, as it supports 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit RGB, 8-bit CMYK, and more...

If you think that web browsers only support things that are easy to implement, you need a serious reality check.
That said, I get the impression that this particular omission has more to do with priorities than with complexity.
While I too would like to see strong support for color and variable fonts, there are many other things missing from the Affinity apps which I would agree should have a much higher priority at the moment - footnotes/endnotes, global layers, cross-references, more vector manipulations, a dog tool...  just to name a few.

What is there to communicate about?  As far as I can tell this thread contains roughly one page of relevant content, about 2 pages of irrelevant content that should have been in other threads, and about 32.5 pages of pointless repetition combined with meaningless fluff that never should have been posted at all.  It would be a waste of time for Serif to respond to the fluff, and the fact that they spend time even reading it means it will probably take them that much longer to get this (and other important features) implemented.
Incessantly pesting them about it is very likely the digital version of shooting yourself in the foot.
(Why am I even bothering to type this...?)

What is there to communicate about?  As far as I can tell this thread contains roughly one page of relevant content, about 2 pages of irrelevant content that should have been in other threads, and about 32.5 pages of pointless repetition combined with meaningless fluff that never should have been posted at all.  It would be a waste of time for Serif to respond to the fluff, and the fact that they spend time even reading it means it will probably take them that much longer to get this (and other important features) implemented.
Incessantly pesting them about it is very likely the digital version of shooting yourself in the foot.
(Why am I even bothering to type this...?)

what have apostrophes and quotation marks got to do with footnotes and endnotes?
does this thread need splitting?

In illustrator and Blender, you have various options for rotation snapping or angle increments that make it much easier to immediately draw inclined lines and shapes based on 10/ 15 / 30/ 45 degree increments (or user specified). It is particularly convenient that it does not require a grid to be set-up in advance. While this is hidden in the preferences menu for illustrator, Blender places the options in the top toolbar and has the option to open the menu with a user-configurable shortcut to immediately change the increment angle. This is illustrator shown below.
Furthermore, this concept could be expanded to draw shapes at an angle (optionally with the constraints active), as is shown here in Krita:
 

If you also have Photo, then you have that function in Publisher. Just switch to the Photo Persona in Publisher and add the layer from there.

Make a pixel layer from a mask:
1. cmd-click on the mask (= selection) 
2. add Pixel layer 
3. fill with black (F5)
- or - 
1. cmd-click on the mask (= selection)
2. add Fill-Layer with black (I use ⇧F for that)
3. right-click and "Rasterize"

I'm not Serif, but I can all but guarantee based on past responses to similar questions that the answer to this is no:
 
 
 
 
 
Consider:
In order to implement desired feature X, features Y, Z and T must be implemented first as they are required to make feature X work.  If feature Q can be implemented rapidly and will benefit someone while features Y and Z are being wrapped up, but feature T can't make it in time for the next release and feature X is the one that showed up on the questionnaire, then how many people are going to complain that feature X didn't make it but features Y, Z and Q did when they were not prioritized by the survey when feature X was?
Serif has been much more open about their roadmap in the past but has largely stopped doing so due to the pointless complaints that have resulted from what they have revealed before when things did not go exactly as they had hoped.

VectorStyler does all of that as well and a great deal more.
Amadine is missing a LOT of features that are critical to many pro users, which the Affinity apps (and VectorStyler) do support, such as spot colors and symbols.  It does have a few things it does nicely that are missing from Designer, but overall is a toy in comparison.

New features could come in 1.11, 1.12, etc. They are unlikely in 1.10.3, 1.10.4, etc.