Jump to content

Parent and daughter objects


Recommended Posts

Before attempting to use the Constraints panel I need to know what parent and daughter objects are?

I can't find anything in Affinity Help.

 

If voting made any difference it wouldn't be allowed!

Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

Mac OS Mojave Version 10.14.6

AD version 1.10.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you checked the Constraints topic in the Help?

-- Walt

   Desktop: new:  Windows 11 Home, version 21H2 (22000.613) 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090  (old: 16GB memory, Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz, GeForce GTX 970 )
   Laptop:  Windows 10 Home, version 21H2 (19044.1706) 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
    Affinity Photo 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1342 Beta   / Affinity Designer 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1342 Beta  / Affinity Publisher 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1282 Beta
 iPad Pro M1, 12.9", iPadOS 15.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard

  Affinity Photo 1.10.5 (.280) and 1.10.2 (.266) Beta / Affinity Designer 1.10.5 (.21) and 1.10.3 (.19) Beta 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, jackamus said:

Before attempting to use the Constraints panel I need to know what parent and daughter objects are?

I think that should be "parent and child"

If it has been translated somewhere as "daughter" that's probably a translation error that should be reported

or did you mean that as a joke?

R.I.P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

iMac 27" Late 2019 Fully Loaded, iMac 27" Late 2013 both running Catalina 10.15.7 - Affinity Designer, Photo & Publisher, Adobe, Inkscape, Blender, C4D, Sketchup, Pepakura Designer + more... XP-Pen Artist-22E, - iPad Pro 12.9 B|  

Affinity Help - Affinity Desktop Tutorials - Feedback - FAQ - most asked questions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, carl123 said:

I think that should be "parent and child"

It should be either "mother and daughter" or "father and son", depending on the user's gender :-)

Affinity Store: Affinity Suite (ADe, APh, APu) 1.10.5.1342.
Windows 10 Pro, Version 21H1, Build 19043.1586.
Dell Latitude E5570, i5-6440HQ 2.60 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics 530, 1920 x 1080.
Dell OptiPlex 7060, i5-8500 3.00 GHz, 16 GB, Intel UHD Graphics 630, Dell P2417H 1920 x 1080.
Intel NUC5PGYH, Pentium N3700 2.40 GHz, 8 GB, Intel HD Graphics, EIZO EV2456 1920 x 1200.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, carl123 said:

I think that should be "parent and child"

By the way: Is it in English still common to say master page, like in master & slave ? – Or does one or the other nowadays have a more neutral term?

I don't know one substitute for "slave" in German because I was always used to English for this couple (SCSI master / slave) – whereas "musterseite" for the single, which means roughly "sample page" or "template page", but both don't appear that functionally "bossy" to me like "master page" expresses, correct?

macOS 10.14.6, MacBookPro Retina 15" + Eizo 27"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, thomaso said:

By the way: Is it in English still common to say master page, like in master & slave ? – Or does one or the other nowadays have a more neutral term?

I don't know one substitute for "slave" in German because I was always used to English for this couple (SCSI master / slave) – whereas "musterseite" for the single, which means roughly "sample page" or "template page", but both don't appear that functionally "bossy" to me like "master page" expresses, correct?

Some inspiration:

Primary - Secondary might be a good alternative within the context of Affinity Apps.

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-04.html#Eglash

To find alternatives to master-slave, one can look to myriad existing implementations. There are also many other relationships that can be used as metaphors, Eglash’s research calls into question the accuracy of the master-slave metaphor. An alternative should be chosen based on the pairing that is most clear in context:

 

  • Primary-secondary based on authority. See for example [RFC8499].
  • Primary-replica based originality.
  • Active-standby based on state.
  • Writer-reader based on function.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, carl123 said:

I think that should be "parent and child"

If it has been translated somewhere as "daughter" that's probably a translation error that should be reported

or did you mean that as a joke?

LOL! This could be viewed as verging on the transgenderism nonsense! It was my mistake having quickly read through the help file and mistook 'Child' for daughter.

Thanks Walt for pointing me towards the Constraints video. It explained it much better than the written instructions which are not very easy to understand.

I did actually create a constrained object from an existing one that I had. It was for creating and adding dimensions and dimension lines to a technical drawing. This I did successfully.

I have been asking Serif to add a draughting feature to Affinity Designer ever since it was first published but so far nothing!

 

If voting made any difference it wouldn't be allowed!

Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

Mac OS Mojave Version 10.14.6

AD version 1.10.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having persevered and had a go at using the 'Constraints' feature I created these two objects (Dimensions). File attached

When I transform 'B' I get the desired effect of making the object resize but I cannot get object 'A' to transform in the same way. Both behave in the desired way when used as intended but not when transforming. Is this to do with the constraints settings of 'A'?

The reason I want to do this is to be able to transform a whole drawing with all the dimensions transforming at the same rate.

 

Transformation.afdesign

If voting made any difference it wouldn't be allowed!

Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

Mac OS Mojave Version 10.14.6

AD version 1.10.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jackamus said:

Thanks Walt for pointing me towards the Constraints video. It explained it much better than the written instructions which are not very easy to understand.

You're welcome, but that was @firstdefence, I believe :) 

-- Walt

   Desktop: new:  Windows 11 Home, version 21H2 (22000.613) 64GB memory, AMD Ryzen 9 5900 12-Core @ 3.00 GHz, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090  (old: 16GB memory, Intel Core i7-6700K @ 4.00GHz, GeForce GTX 970 )
   Laptop:  Windows 10 Home, version 21H2 (19044.1706) 32GB memory, Intel Core i7-10750H @ 2.60GHz, Intel UHD Graphics Comet Lake GT2 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU.
    Affinity Photo 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1342 Beta   / Affinity Designer 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1342 Beta  / Affinity Publisher 1.10.5 (.1342) and 1.10.5.1282 Beta
 iPad Pro M1, 12.9", iPadOS 15.4.1, Apple Pencil 2, Magic Keyboard

  Affinity Photo 1.10.5 (.280) and 1.10.2 (.266) Beta / Affinity Designer 1.10.5 (.21) and 1.10.3 (.19) Beta 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jackamus said:

When I transform 'B' I get the desired effect of making the object resize but I cannot get object 'A' to transform in the same way. Both behave in the desired way when used as intended but not when transforming. Is this to do with the constraints settings of 'A'?

I can't solve but notice an unexpected horizontal dimension of the main group, respectively its child group: It seems to be forced to this width erroneously: …

793967102_constraintAorig1.thumb.jpg.5aab5723164c28b6c3799f7f00eca80f.jpg

... whereas it does not occur if all containing child layers get selected only:

2101041153_constraintAorig2.jpg.ee402f1f3899273a90154a97af3119e4.jpg

I experienced such a confusion for group dimensions occasionally and without use of the constraint feature. I never detected what does cause such an issue. Sometimes it got fixed by ungrouping + regrouping but here it doesn't change the oddity for the 'A' constraint, neither for its main nor its child group. Also if reduced to only 1 group (including the text layer as in 'B') the issue insists for the group.

Maybe someone else has an idea?

macOS 10.14.6, MacBookPro Retina 15" + Eizo 27"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, NotMyFault said:

Primary - Secondary might be a good alternative within the context of Affinity Apps.

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-04.html#Eglash

Interesting article, how did you notice it? Because of working yourself in this area? In particular the recent development, the changes done already are interesting and seem to document both the need and running process of renaming certain terms for political reasons and inclusive speech, for instance …

Python (2018): https://www.vice.com/en/article/8x7akv/masterslave-terminology-was-removed-from-python-programming-language

GitHub (2020): https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7qbyv/github-to-remove-masterslave-terminology-from-its-platform

Though the Affinity UI doesn't use "slave" (afaik) it appears useful to alter the term "master", whereas "primary page" or "writer page" sounds ambigous to me and possibly conflict with the visual layer hierarchy in the Layers panel (like parent-child would do, too), respectively with the understanding of "editor" / "author".

Concerning the master as a specific, leading type of page I wonder if "main page" or "leading page" would work?

macOS 10.14.6, MacBookPro Retina 15" + Eizo 27"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Parent / Child nomenclature can have one Parent and several Child layers (and grandchild layers). Whereas a Primary / Secondary could imply only one secondary layer.

MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 11.7

Affinity Designer 1.10.5 | Affinity Photo 1.10.5 | Affinity Publisher 1.10.5 | Beta versions as they appear.

I have never mastered color management, period, so I cannot help with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think “master” on its own may be tolerable, unless it is combined with “slave” - which is not the case here.

5 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

the Parent / Child nomenclature can have one Parent and several Child layers (and grandchild layers). Whereas a Primary / Secondary could imply only one secondary layer.

I don't agree, secondary does not limit the cardinality to one. This would (unnecessary) mix the rank/level and the number of objects in that rank.

Most childs have 2 parents ;-)

Think more of a rank or level, e.g. a tree has one root node, multiple nodes (2nd level or secondary), and multiple leafs (tertiary elements)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thomaso said:

I can't solve but notice an unexpected horizontal dimension of the main group, respectively its child group: It seems to be forced to this width erroneously: …

793967102_constraintAorig1.thumb.jpg.5aab5723164c28b6c3799f7f00eca80f.jpg

... whereas it does not occur if all containing child layers get selected only:

2101041153_constraintAorig2.jpg.ee402f1f3899273a90154a97af3119e4.jpg

I experienced such a confusion for group dimensions occasionally and without use of the constraint feature. I never detected what does cause such an issue. Sometimes it got fixed by ungrouping + regrouping but here it doesn't change the oddity for the 'A' constraint, neither for its main nor its child group. Also if reduced to only 1 group (including the text layer as in 'B') the issue insists for the group.

Maybe someone else has an idea?

I have attached the file where I use these dimension lines. The problem is I I select the whole group and graba bounding box handle and drag diagonally in order to transform it to a slightly smaller size you will notice that all the dimension lines transform as expected but the two 25mm dimensions transform at a different rate. Why should this be?

Stairs.afdesign

If voting made any difference it wouldn't be allowed!

Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.

Mac OS Mojave Version 10.14.6

AD version 1.10.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, jackamus said:

The reason I want to do this is to be able to transform a whole drawing with all the dimensions transforming at the same rate.

 

1 hour ago, jackamus said:

I I select the whole group and graba bounding box handle and drag diagonally in order to transform it to a slightly smaller size

Maybe I'm not understanding the situation....

But it sounds like you don't need constraints at all (don't let that stop you from learning it though).
I'm seeing that you want to scale everything proportionally. Yes?
For that, get rid of all the constraints. Select all your lines & lines w/arrows and in the stroke panel turn on "Scale with object".

Now grab everything and scale away. Because you have text also use the "extra" floating handle off of the lower right corner when scaling. That will automatically keep things in proportion (as opposed to having to hold the shift key on the regular/other corners). 

....or maybe you're trying to do something else 🥴.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.