cubesquareredux

@Patrick Connor
Thank you for your honest reply.
Naturally, Serif would like for their product to be successful. But you can also imagine how desperate many people are for there to be an affordable alternative to the Adobe suite of apps and their onerous subscription pay model. This, in concert with Apple forcing migration to all 64-bit apps in the next 6-9 months, has many freelance designers and small creative agencies, who have been clinging to the last available perpetual license to the Adobe suite (CS6) for as long as possible, in a mild state of panic.
It may be more than Serif can deliver on within the year, but I, and I suspect many creatives, are desperately clinging to the hope that Serif will provide the escape route from having one's work and finances trapped by Adobe and their subscription model for "renting" tools. It's no mean feat, but means achieving feature parity with the Adobe suite, and breaking through Adobe's virtual monopoly enforced by an "industry standard" proprietary file format.
All of my hopes and best wishes are with Serif and their ability to pull this off.

+1 … of course … 
And the option of converting footnotes to endnotes and vice versa. And the option of using a different number of columns for footnotes than for the main text. And the option of positioning footnote frames freely on a spread. And …

I think you need particularly the import from InDesign CS6 format. Many users do survive with this last perpetual version hoping and praying to be able to finally switch

@Ehyup
Welcome to the Serif Affinity forum  
I have merged your post into this popular thread as it goes some way to helping those asking a similar question.

Who showed that?
The shortcuts you most recently showed don't do that. They show the studio itself, not the View > Studio pulldown list.

If I may add a related question:
Writing a particular book at the moment, I find it easier to handle files chapter by chapter: these are smallish files I can create, edit, and circulate for review.
When the time comes, is there a simple way to merge my chapter files, create a global table of contents, create a global index, and so on?
Or should I be working with one big "book" file from the start?
Thanks for any advice.

Fair question.
Some history: I've been using Macs since the first one was available. When Charles Simonyi's Word was first released for the Mac, I used it, quite happily. I stayed with Word until version 5.1 (this was in the early '90s). Then Microsoft simply discarded that product and offered its so-called "version 6." In disgust I discarded Microsoft: not only its word-processor but everything. I found alternatives and never went back. (In those days, before Windows 95 swamped the software market, there were still a number of decent alternatives on the Mac side.) Similarly, when Adobe released Photoshop and later InDesign I used both products, quite happily. You can maybe guess when I discarded Adobe, never to return.
When Apple released Pages and Numbers, I used both, and still use both, quite happily. (Luckily my days of giving stand-up presentations are mostly over, but if they weren't I'd be a satisfied Keynote user as well.) Meanwhile I've been using BBEdit for various tasks since Rich Siegel first made it available at no charge (this also was in the early '90s).
So that's a bit of background.
You ask why I'm writing this particular book directly in Publisher. Answer: It's a bit of an experiment. The book is about 50% "primary text" and 50% images, charts, call-outs, and marginalia of various kinds. What I find is that the positioning of all these items on the page affects the text I want to write. If I were to write the text separately without thinking about what appears next to it on the page, I'd be writing a different (and inferior) book.
I suppose I could use a separate writing tool and then assemble collages on paper to see what's what — but I stopped doing that somewhere in the '80s.
 
So far, I've written only a few chapters; eventually there will be many. Each one is relatively short. While preparing each chapter, obviously I've kept to a sort of "master format" that's common to all chapters. If I have to copy/paste all files into one, or "add them up" in some other Affinity-designed way, there should not be any conflicts.
Yes, a "book" feature would be grand. (Honestly I'm still a little shocked that it wasn't built in from Day Zero.)
Thanks much for your comment. Additional advice would be more than welcome.
 

That is their meaning in Publisher. Widow and Orphan control applies at the tops and bottoms of columns. They are part of the text flow settings that may move text into the next column. They are not part of H&J and do not change line-end decisions.
Currently we don't do whole-paragraph justification. The closest we have to controlling runts is in the hyphenation section. The hyphenation zone can be different at the end of a paragraph; a larger zone will be less likely to hyphenate the last word of a paragraph.

might be useful to be able to filter the list?

Publisher allows you to install your own spelling dictionaries and hyphenation dictionaries, and many additional dictionaries are available on the web already. You can look for dictionaries that are compatible with Hunspell, or start with the dictionaries made available for LibreOffice.
For example, the Dutch dictionaries available here should work. Just download hyph_nl_NL.dic, nl_NL.aff, and nl_NL.dic and place them in the "additional dictionaries" directory shown at the bottom of the Preferences, Tools dialog.

I am so much hoping publisher is becoming great.
I just gave up on Quark Xpress and despite everything I tried against it have to go with Adobe CC now, because QX lacks so much in behaviour and GUI it is a shame. But me hope lies with affinity publisher. If this gets to a usable state, I will instantly bury CC.

Is there any reason you're doing this directly in Publisher first? I would think basic text files (LibraOffice, Word, etc.) would be the best for writing, editing, and circulating chapters of a book. Publisher is more for final layout, I would think. Unless your book includes a lot of images you want proofed at the same time?
If the are already individually saved in Publisher, as it's still in Beta, I think your best bet of merging would be to open all of the individual files, and then copy/paste into a comprehensive file? Since there is currently no 'book' feature. Then the rest (TOC and indexing) can all be done in the one file.
Otherwise, if you're not in a hurry, I'd suggest waiting and hope they implement a 'book' feature so you don't have to go through that tedious work.

Hey, watch it. I resemble that remark.
 
— cubesquareredux

Hey, watch it. I resemble that remark.
 
— cubesquareredux

Hey, watch it. I resemble that remark.
 
— cubesquareredux

Hey, watch it. I resemble that remark.
 
— cubesquareredux

@alano69
Welcome to the Serif Affinity Forums.  
It's already a thing

I spent 4 minutes staring at your message with a big question mark over my wine filled brain, then suddenly, without warning an electrical charge turned the question mark into a delightful 400 watt light bulb....

Hey, watch it. I resemble that remark.
 
— cubesquareredux

Because text styles can include lists. The style is a way of applying a list, but the list can also be applied directly from the Paragraph panel.

You were both right, of course!
Digging into the (Canon) printer's settings, I found Layout > Two-Sided > Short-Edge binding.
And that did the trick.
 
 
Thank you for this reminder!   Ink cartridges these days do seem to come with about five smidgens of ink in them.
AGAIN: Thanks, everyone.
Now I'm off to ask another silly question, this time about text frames.
 

Well that's true, but I do think the one with a white fill is slightly bigger, however a little bit of math equation and I worked out that mine would consume about 0.0005 picolitre of ink per square 0.1 mm, and yours would consume about 0.000004 Picolitre of ink per cubic 0.01 mm, further calculations, (this is really taxing my brain), based upon Prof. Gringe's quadratic law of christmosity (after factoring in the differential between the cubic and square results I obtained) results in a clear case that you are right by 0.0000025 picolitre of ink.  More wine please...

How so, Chris? What can you see with

that you can’t also see with

??
 
  No, in 16 pt type it will hardly break the bank, but when you wrote ‘big letters’ I envisioned something more like 216 pt!

Are Bits of cheese or big bits of cheese?  Yes but with a black line you won't know if the printed paper came out upside down now will you?  Besides, the word YES in 16 font size will hardly break the cost?  Or is it that Bank?

If you set the fill of the text to white or ‘no fill’ and apply a thin black stroke, you’ll not only save on paper costs but ink or toner, too.