RickyO

I am working with long documents (books containing mostly text). Plain text loses the local formatting (italic and bold) which is dangerous because it is difficult to find every instance of the local formatting in the original document and transfer that by hand to the APub document. There may be other styles applied that could be missed. Tags of some sort would need to be used in Word, and then Find and Replace, but what is the most practical way to do that? So I don't think plain text is the way to go for a longer document.
RTF imports all the styles from Word, including the italics and bold, so may as well Place the .docx file and bring in the Styles that way.
Based on my experiments, the "best" and quickest way is to apply separate styles to body text, headings, quotes, verse, etc., in MSWord, but keep it as clean as possible, with as few styles as possible. Then create a new document in APub, and Detach and Delete All Styles (using the option in the Text Styles panel menu). Then Place the Word document. Then adjust the Text Styles that are imported as desired, if necessary.

Yes copy and paste without format. And yes I manually apply bold and italic in APu. Importing styles (even just bold and italic)from Word was just too time consuming and I just prefer having a ‘clean’ base to work from.

I find it more reliable to do all my formatting in Affinity and only import Word files as plain text.

It is also possible to do this in the layers studio.
Create a new blank masterpage and assign it to the page with the contents. In the layers panel unlock the master page. Now select every element in the layers above the master page and move them into the master page. Lock the master page again. Finally remove the masterpage from the page. Now all the content is part of a new masterpage and can be applied to other pages. This is not the Inkscape method but it should work for now 
d.

Thanks for the positive feedback everybody! I'll update the PDF next week with any corrections to issues you've reported. Follow this thread to get notified through the forums when an updated version is available.
It's confusingly worded so I'll rephrase it. FYI, "Lanczos 3 (separable)" is higher quality but slower than the options listed above it in the manual and "Lanczos 3 (non-separable)" is similar in quality to "Lanczos 3 (separable)" but slightly slower. For most users, and unless you have a slow computer, "Lanczos 3 (separable)" is probably your best choice of quality and speed and there's little reason to ever change this setting.
Cheers,
Mike

[Updated Nov 30 2023 - new version for Publisher 2.3 with 120 more pages than the first version]
Learn how to format text and publish books and other long documents with Affinity Publisher 2.3. This free in-depth manual is filled with steps, tips, and recommendations for:
Character and paragraph formatting - added Nov 30 Text styles - added Nov 30 Documents, Pages, Master Pages, Sections, and Baseline Grid Text Frames, Text Flow, and Stories Books and Chapters Cross-References, Table of Contents, and Index Notes - including Footnotes, Sidenotes, and Endnotes Fields - including Page Numbering, Running Headers, and Custom Variables Anchors and Hyperlinks Printing and Exporting Settings This manual does not cover objects and photos so it covers approximately half of the topics.
Updated version:
Publisher Manual Nov 29 2023.pdf
 
Q&A
Is there a full manual I can purchase? No, this is all there is. Is this really free? Yes, I'm making it available free of charge. It's copyrighted to prevent others from publishing it as their own. Is there an iPad version? No, the steps and screenshots are for the macOS and Windows versions. Is there a version for Designer or Photo? No, but the text features are largely the same so you may find it useful. Why does it use a print layout if it's a PDF? It's a demonstration of how to use the features it describes to create a print book. Original version:
Publisher Manual Sep 26 2023.pdf
Publisher Manual Sep 18 2023.pdf

I'm unsure. I just intended to explain the Books feature since it's so difficult to know if it's the right choice for your project until you've broken your book into chapter files. And if it turns out it was the wrong choice, it's hard to put the chapters back together again. I need to get back to my other book project but I imagine I'll expand this a bit in the future when I feel an itch to document a feature. I added the section on keyboard shortcuts yesterday while waiting for the release of 2.2.
Thanks for catching this. If I had been sending this to print I would have engaged proofreaders but since this was a free project I knew there would be some copy/paste mistakes like this. Here's what the first example should have been, I will change this in the first update.

Will do, thanks.

In Adobe InDesign, one can drag a Page icon from the Pages window into the Master Pages window to create a Master from a Page. 
One can also select a page or a spread, then, from the Pages panel options menu, select the command to "Save as Master".

Walt is right, the correct way to transfer a master page from one document to another is to use Add Pages from File. Just choose to add one page or spread based on the master rather than all pages. Publisher will add that page or spread as well as the master(s) it is based on. Then you can delete the added pages if you don't want them, keeping just the masters. I just tried it on macOS without issues but there may be something in your document causing issues. Try making a copy of the source document and deleting all of its pages, leaving just the masters. Then use Add Page from File for this reduced document.
If you're adding the master to a new document, don't bother with this, just duplicate the document and delete all the pages, index marks, etc., until you have a blank document with the masters.
Cheers

If you've purchased Affinity V2 for Windows directly from the Affinity Store, you will have downloaded an MSIX package. You will notice when installing Affinity V2 you will not be offered the ability to change the installation path. This is expected and is down to how MSIX packages work. All Windows Apps are installed to the default drive set in Settings > System > Storage.
There are two options to change where Affinity V2 is installed to:
Temporarily change "Where new content is saved" by going to Settings > System > Storage > More / Advanced Storage Settings > Change where new contact is saved and select the required drive from the New apps will save to: dropdown menu. Once you've installed the app to the new drive, you can revert this setting back to Local Disk (C:) 
  Move the app to a different drive once installed by going to Settings > Apps > Apps & Features selecting the Affinity App and clicking Move Please note: It's only possible to pick the drive where you want the app installed to but not the full location. Unfortunately, this is handled by Windows and cannot be changed by the user.

That's fine with me.  I pay for quality, and consider Affinity to be QUALITY.  (I want them around for a long time.)

THANK YOU!!!!
You are a walking, typing resource ala VF's!
... I think it's time for affinity to sincerely consider (aka adopt) them.
Thanks again.

Hi @biz_kid1,
there is a forum section called 'Resources' where you could share your files:
https://forum.affinity.serif.com/index.php?/forum/11-resources/
Cheers,
d.

Is there a resource for this? I can add what I've made as templates.  Not sure where to upload them otherwise.

I think a nice solution to this would be to add the functionality to create and store templates in Publisher but not include them in the app, they could be added to the resources section of the forum for users to choose which ones they need. Additional templates could be added by users. This way people that do not need them do not have the additional bloat in the app and those that do want them have easy access to add them. They could add a link in the template area of the app that directs users to the wherever it is decided to store them.

I believe offering templates in a few website editing suites has led to their quick and successful acceptance.  Not offering any endorsements, but products such as Elementor, DIVI, and others.  Many offer internal methods for creating one's own template library, but also a ton of pre-builts. 

That seems to work, to an extent.  In Windows, you can only assign a file extension to one app.  I'm finding in Win11Pro, that if the file type assignment for the .aftemplate extension is set for APhoto, and I go to create a new APub file from a template I've previously created in and saved from APub, that template will not be available in the template dialogue box in APub; and vice-a-versa for APhoto.  (haven't tried in ADesigner.)  This only wastes a lot of valuable time, archaic.  Why can't Serif create separate file extensions for the template files for each app?  Consider how much time is wasted x the number of Affinity users who use all three apps.  They can do better.  Very frustrating.

Thank you!

In Affinity Publisher 1.10.5.1342
The anchors are picking up every heading and subheading, and while they are linked in each page I can't rearrange them or delete them. It would  be nice to have some configuration setting for how they should behave, and to be able to to reorganize them properly without defaulting to alphabetical order.

Thank You!  You are a magnificent RESOURCE!

@walt.farrell It turns out GF does have the current axis registry listed in a user friendly way.
It is at the bottom of their variable fonts list - there is an Axis definitions tab.
https://fonts.google.com/variablefonts#axis-definitions
Those are just brief descriptions.
The GF Knowledge info in-progress will expand on that with demo images, etc.
 

Please Serif, add this to your apps.

There is a discussion about variable font pricing on TypeDrawers (where major font developers hang out). And as you can imagine there are differing opinions and pricing strategies. Some just add-up the total of the static fonts replaced (which is dumb in my opinion). Others have priced the VF for less - acknowledging that most users do not buy all the statics now. But they too are trying to adjust to this new market. It is going to take awhile for it to reach a new level.
Regarding web font pricing - I think it is insane (on some fonts). It amazes me that some people pay what look to me as ridiculous rates.
Fun fact: Google Fonts (GF) changed the Open Sans web font to variable in August 2021 (most people did not notice anything as the replacement was seamless). A GF web fonts insider mentioned in a TypeDrawers discussion that in Oct. 2021 they were serving that font 40 billion times a week. With a B. In a week. For free.

Depends on the application.
The easiest thing to do just insert shapes. (wam bam "We Support Variable Fonts")
InDesign inserts text which can be searched, screen readers work, edited, etc.
There is an ongoing discussion in GitHub about how to best design a variable font interface.
I hope Affinity asks for some early feedback when they decide to support variable fonts.
Regarding how will variable fonts be used in Affinity apps ...
Most users are going to easily understand the Weight and Width axes.
But the Optical Size is going to be the most immediately useful to the most users.
Adjustable Optical Size can have a noticeable effect on the quality.
Google Fonts has been going thru all of their VF fonts and making the Optical Size (opsz) axis scales match up to the expected point size settings. This way in the interface you can link the opsz to the point size and always have the "optimal" optical size.
This will help the beginner better results immediately, and help the "expert" hacks.
Helvetica Now Variable has Weight, Width, and Optical Size axes.
I am sure experts who design advertising for multiple media know how to use Optical Size properly.
They can create ads for phone, tablet, desktop, TV, kiosk, light panels, billboards, etc.
All properly optical size adjusted for display size and viewing distance.
Experts will notice, and know how to use it well.
Text book publishers can immediately use variable optical size.
All static optical size fonts have a built-in design size which may not match the text.
If a "caption" font design size is 6pt, when it is set at 9pt in the book it will look too dark.
If a "text" font design size is 12pt, when it is set in the book at 10.5pt it is going to look too light.
Same with the subhead, heading, and display static optical fonts.
You would have to have hundreds of optical size static fonts to be optimal.
Or one variable font which you can adjust exactly.
Grade is the other axis which is immediately useful.
Grade is like weight but there is no change in the character width.
Some fonts have tabular figures which stay the same width over all weights, this is similar.
Think of that for the entire font.
Apple added Grade (GRAD) to their interface variable font in 2020.
The upcoming Roboto Flex for Android will also add GRAD, and many other axes.
Grade is very useful for interfaces, and for print forms where space is tight.
Grade can also be an easy way to change the color of text without affecting the layout.
Book text looks a bit light, tweak the grade to darken it a bit, and have no reflow (on 400 pages).
There are other use cases, and advantages to advanced variable fonts.
For example much higher level justification is possible (and has been demonstrated).
The technology is rapidly changing.
Early adopters and knowledgeable experts are using variable fonts now.
The development of the variable fonts is happening very fast now.
The applications are lagging behind.
 

No, basically font designers have put — and are increasingly putting — this control into users’ hands. And that‘s the point: the font industry is moving over to variable. From a type designer‘s point of view, it‘s much more interesting and satisfying to create a variable font; typographically it‘s a much more sophisticated and powerful tool. I concentrated in my comment on the practical stuff variable fonts can do, but there are so many cool new things variable fonts can do — and not just with letterforms. For instance, because variable fonts interpolate between glyphs, animation in digital environments becomes incredibly smooth (Laurence Penney’s animated Muybridge horse, on his Axis-Praxis site, is an early case in point). It makes sense for symbol libraries (fontawesome, ionicons, etc.) to be in variable format too, to support the growing range of different looks for the same icon.

And here‘s the situation with variable fonts. All the main browsers came out with support for them in 2018. Apple’s and Microsoft‘s systems support them (Apple‘s SF Pro system font *is a variable font*). Most of the other main graphics packages support them (Adobe Creative Suite, Sketch, Corel Draw etc.). They are not just the future, but the present too. But Affinity doesn’t see them as a priority. WAKE UP AFFINITY!!! You‘ve put yourselves into the same category as Internet Explorer!

I’m a print designer by background, and fine typography on paper is my first love. But these days, like so many others, I work across physical and digital media. I want the user‘s experience to be consistent across media — I don‘t want to be using one sophisticated font format on the web and a more primitive one in Publlisher/Designer/Photo (which is, ironically, an exact inversion of the first ten years of the web!) Most especially, I don‘t want to be stuck in 2017 forever because I went with the stubborn, knows-better graphics software provider.