Just download it to your ipad and pick "open in Ibooks" or download it to your computer and email it to yourself and then pick "open in iBooks" from your iPad.
The "un-named" entry at the top is the table of contents as in the help file and it scrolls on my iPad. However it does block the screen content. If you choose to scroll the "table of contents" from Ibooks it is not hierarchically organized - but the screen is full. Best way to find something after that is to do a search. Its very comprehensive. (My continuing love/hate relationship with technology.)
Its a spectacular resource on an iPad Pro. If you have an android tablet, go to Google Play and search for "epub reader".
Affinity Photo and Designer are no longer Beta software, and I love em a lot.
But I have to say a manual like thing is needed. Maybe just a statement of the model of interaction would be a good first step. Tutorials are good, but I've been using Designer and Photo for about a year now, as needed, and I cannot say I have internalized a "model of interaction" for them.
In order for this software to have been developed, the writers, by necessity, must have a shared idea of an exact model of interaction for the software.
Every time I need to use a mask, I have to try 10 or more things before I find the right way to do what I want.
Every time I want to adjust type I struggle a to find the control I want, or I find it and it has no effect (until I find another one that overrides it.)
WTF is a pixel layer and when and why might I need it.
Placed items do not seem to have a linking function. Is there a linking function and if not why place an item rather than just cut and paste? etc.
In short, it seems like the model of interaction is inconsistent or obscure. I'd love to be wrong on this. I'm sure part of my difficulty has to do with the complexity and flexibility of the software. Obviously Designer isn't just a vector program and Photo isn't just bitmap one. But I have experience with software like the the Adobe suite, Painter, various CAD and solid modeling packages etc. But many of these are easy to pick up because the model of interaction is either well explained, or very apparent (the others are hard to use.) The Affinity SW seems to largely follow the Illustrator / Photoshop model, but seems to regularly stray from it in unexpected ways. I'm sure there's a reason. Please share. :-)
*** Is there a resource somewhere that lays out a model of interaction that the creators of the software try to adhere to? That indicates major and/or philosophical differences between Photo and Designer and Affinity and Adobe's approaches? Something that would generally serve as a guide to approaching what should be done in what way and how? *** Thanks.
