[Publisher] Border around Artistic Text tool drawn text

[barrettorama]

I noticed my artistic text tool text has borders around it. I'm not sure if I've accidentally turned something on.  I can try to redo the  page... But I'd really like to know why it's happening.

(FYI: Turning on the stroke style outlines the letters not the box the letters are in.)

 

Any thoughts on how to remove these?

Windows 10/version 1.8.4/Publisher

 

The image attached with the toolbar on the side is Publisher with some details (i.e. no stroke width)

The other image is an from an exported PDF.

 

Thank you.

 

[thomaso]

8 minutes ago, barrettorama said:

(i.e. no stroke width)

It's assigned in the Text Frame Panel ...

... and possibly saved in the Defaults 

[barrettorama]

Ohhhhh!

Thank you, Thank you, Thomaso.

 

I saw that mentioned somewhere and looked for that... I was in Designer mode. It's only in View > Studio... in Publisher mode.

 

[thomaso]

Oh barettorama, glad you found it! And glad you say mode, not persona

[walt.farrell]

8 hours ago, thomaso said:

And glad you say mode, not persona

Why "glad"?

Persona is the proper term, as it's what you need to use to communicate clearly and find things in the documentation.

[barrettorama]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

Why "glad"?

Persona is the proper term, as it's what you need to use to communicate clearly and find things in the documentation.

To be fair, The documentation doesn't mention the specific persona is required for the Text Frame panel. So I'd say it's not clearly communicated in the first place.

https://affinity.help/publisher/en-US.lproj/index.html?page=pages/Text/frameText.html?title=Frame text

Maybe when they give my Affinity some AI I'll call it a persona

 

[GarryP]

The documentation for Publisher assumes you are in the Publisher Persona which is the default Persona – the only Persona you have access to if you only have Publisher installed.
The other Personas are only available if you have other software installed and the documentation for those applications will tell you what you can do in those Personas.

Note: In your original post you didn’t mention that you were in the Designer Persona, only that you were using Publisher, so you got an answer which related to Publisher. While you are in the Designer Persona of Publisher you are, essentially, in Designer (with a little less functionality that is normally available in Designer). I hope this helps to clear things up a bit.

[thomaso]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

Persona is the proper term, as it's what you need to use to communicate clearly and find things in the documentation.

It is a feeling, nothing more. To me it feels strange when I shall understand myself as one of various Personas, limited to a certain surrounding.

Though it is a common term inside Affinity I would not call it proper. There was not only no need at all to invent this term as a name for an item of new Affinity UI but also the term appears to be common already with a different meaning in software development , where it is similar to a specific individual of a target group, and a term of marketing this way.

"Persona" in Affinity does neither make the communication clearly nor is it relevant for documentation. For instance having the term "persona" doesn't support to know what Affinity features are available as "Develop Persona" and what belong to the "Photo Persona", or when they may export as any Persona and when they need to switch to be the "Export Persona". Actually the toolbar buttons to switch to another persona don't need this additional suffix, in practise the user switches e.g. from APub to Photo, toggles between apps and features, not personas, within certain limitations (inside APub, "StudioLink") or without limitation and entirely leaving one app and working in another (File > Edit in...).

To me it simply feels more natural (human persona) – and less like being treated as an object of marketing – to speak instead about "mode" or similar abstract terms. I am glad I don't have to be the "Separated Persona" when activating the Separated Mode. And luckily I don't have to become an RGB persona when working in this color mode or space, nor do I have to be a text frame persona when using the Text Frame Tool or Panel – or a forums persona right now.

[walt.farrell]

20 minutes ago, thomaso said:

I am glad I don't have to be the "Separated Persona" when activating the Separated Mode. And luckily I don't have to become an RGB persona when working in this color mode or space, nor do I have to be a text frame persona when using the Text Frame Tool or Panel – or a forums persona right now.

"You" are never the Persona that Affinity is talking about. The Persona is the personality the software switches to to provide the functions.

(But thanks for sharing your thoughts.)

23 minutes ago, thomaso said:

in practise the user switches e.g. from APub to Photo,

Sorry, but no. Switching from Publisher to Photo is done by File > Edit in Photo. That is the only action that puts you into the Photo application and gives you all the functions of the Photo application. In Publisher, you only get access to the functions of the Photo application's Photo Persona. And that is part of the reason that I believe we need to use the proper terminology (where "proper" means "as defined by the application developer and used in their documentation).

 

[thomaso]

3 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

"You" are never the Persona that Affinity is talking about. The Persona is the personality the software switches to to provide the functions.

Ah, thank's for clarifying this. – But how do you know? The use doesn't seem to make it clear, e.g. if one says: "You need to switch to Pixel Persona".

To me it sounds even worse if the app expects me to see it as persona. Would you call Alexa and Siri personas? Do you see any vehicle as a "transport persona"? Would a "food persona" be a a cooking person, or a thermomix? Using "persona" to name technical items, objects or features becomes ridiculous once you understand what it names indeed. Like an office is an area within an architecture but never a "work persona", a section within software architecture is no persona, too.

5 minutes ago, walt.farrell said:

31 minutes ago, thomaso said:

in practise the user switches e.g. from APub to Photo,

Sorry, but no. Switching from Publisher to Photo is done by File > Edit in Photo.

I get what you mean, I see this specific term as just redundant, fake or error. As I said, in practise there are two ways to switch, either via button or via menu, with different results. The term "persona" may be used to distinguish these two options but you would understand as well if it would be called "Photo Mode", "Photo Area", "Photo StudioLink" or "APub's Photo.app", instead of "Photo persona".

Now, if you turn this discussion to the term "app" or "application" and might argue using StudioLink doesn't switch the app, I could reply that the application "APub" is a placeholder for a bunch of many folders, files, commands, processes and features which are used, opened and running parallel to this single APub.app as soon this app gets launched. So, like you would not need to say to launch the "AutoUpdate.app" (which resides inside the APub.app) to cause a check for an Update from inside APub, it is also not neccessary to name the UI area of Designer features, accessed via StudioLink, being a "Designer persona". Yes, since the UI in Affinity apps is split in different visual areas which exclude each other, it may help to have a word for them. But I doubt it is necessary, at least the decision for "persona" sounds weird. That's why I answered to your initial question "Why glad?": "It is a feeling, nothing more".

[R C-R]

18 hours ago, thomaso said:

To me it sounds even worse if the app expects me to see it as persona.

Why? How would this be any different from expecting a folder, tool, button, layer, or any other virtual object to be a real physical one that somehow exists inside the computer?

"Persona" is just a metaphor, probably chosen for its similarity to how people adopt different personas depending on who or what they are interacting with. 

[thomaso]

R C-R, simply because the terms "folder, tool, button, layer, or any other virtual object" refer to objects – whereas "persona" refers to person, to human.

Of cause the Affinity personas are metaphorical – from this perspective you may switch all words in their meaning, simply by picking an attribute of one and use its word for another, and even create a new language this way.

I wouldn't ask "why?" but rather "For what purpose?". Just for fun, as l'art pur l'art, or because of a social need, with a real advantage? In the recent decades there was a bunch of terms created in society and politics, each of them was meant to replace the former use to increase precision and correctness, – but the renaming process deosn't seem to achieve its initial goal: to reduce discrimination of the renamed personas.

Not only Siri and Alexa could be felt or labeled as personas, you also may name any tool, button, layer or panel a persona, too, just because of its interacting attribute, and not only in virtual life by the way. Aside any creativity of Serif's marketing personas: when changing the known, common meaning of words the naming process may also get destructively this way. Whereas language always is a mover persona.

As barrettorama wrote: "Maybe when they give my Affinity some AI I'll call it a persona " – But then there is also the term "Avatar".