datorhaexa

@Dan C Thanks for the reply!
I suspected such a dependency but I don't recall this happening before. Anyway. Will see if a PDF will pass the requirements or else go an extra step through a bitmap application.

Not necessarily. Affinity can be used for producing both vector and raster output and has tools/features specifically for help working/optimising vector objects for bitmap output. Although vector objects are not confined "to rectilinear shapes perfectly aligned with the canvas" they can and should be aligned (with the pixel grid) if the output is intended to be seen on a screen (web/GUI) particularly small elements as they will appear more sharp and polished - both bitmaps and vector elements (SVG icons for example - despite being scalable they can still appear blurry if not aligned). Parts/sections that are not vertical/horizontal aligned (diagonal lines) can still be optimised through the choice of appropriate angles when possible or coverage maps/blend gamma adjustments and curve antialiasing can be controlled through carefully node placement (half-pixels). Small elements like logos and icons can be optimised manually through node placement and other techniques. Although these optimisations don't make everything fit a squared pixel grid because there's angled/round elements involved they improve the visual quality considerably.
 
 
 
Browser scaling/resampling doesn't solve all problems. Besides visual quality degradation (in particular for small elements), are you serving single images (HiDPI or not) to all devices on your webpages? Ratio quality-size also (still) matters.
Zooming on an webpage to see details/read text or forcing a larger font size is sign of poor web design. These are tools to overcome page design limitations (or help overcome disabilities) not solutions/practises to follow. Fixed-width websites are being deprecated in favour of responsive web design where breakpoints should be used to make the layouts adapt to the device that's being used. If the page is well designed the user should not have to rely on these settings/options to see/use it.

So, for the sake a scroll wheel notch you can scale the object to the desired approximate dimensions and then mouse over the number.{whatever} and move the scroll wheel up or down to your desired perfect pixel dimension?

 

Sorry I don't see how this could be any simpler to be honest. If there is an option that says "Force pixel alignment" I expect the program to force alignment to whole pixels, period.
For types of work where you want fractured pixels you would disable "force pixel alignment".
Anything but 50.5.
Otherwise you'd have to rename the option to "Try aligning to pixels if it's convenient". In that case please add another option "Mercilessly force pixel alignment" for web designers.
Cheers

@MEB: That's exactly my point. Snapping should not override "Force pixel alignment". It' says force, so please actually force.
I use Affinity Designer for web design, I never ever want any half pixels when sizing and positioning objects. Snapping is useful so I don't want to go and turn it on and off again all the time.
From my point of view, if I tell Designer to force pixel alignment I should never see fractured pixels on newly positioned and sized objects anymore.