I want to use it, but if I’m going to commit to learning a new system for my work, I need to know that 1) it will remain open source (like LaTeX), 2) its going to remain maintained, 3) it has a robust package library, 4) it has to understand bibtex. I dont think typst has committed to the first, its not mature enough for 2 or 3, and I cannot for the life of me figure out how to automate translation between bibtex and their funky format.
To the people who switched to it from latex for technical documents (involving equations), how much adjustment did it need? I’m in the process of writing some papers/presentations and I’m fairly comfortable with latex but sometimes I do wish it was simpler
It’s much easier to get started than latex if assuming no previous knowledge of either, to the point I can actually recommend it to people in humanities and non-STEM in general. Syntax-wise it’s very different, so you’ll need to get used to it and look up the docs. I’ve been writing latex for ~5y before Typst and I think Typst’s documentation is FAR better than any latex source I came across: no messing with random outdated packages that are incompatible with your template’s, and don’t get me started on that bibtex/biblatex hellhole.
In Typst, most error messages are actually useful to describe the issue; you won’t waste time setting up your local build if you want to typeset offline; and the output is generated FAST - pretty much as you type it - which helps a lot with learning what works and what doesn’t.
The downside is that because it’s not as popular yet, it’s harder to find that magic stack overflow answer that solves your problem. So if you’re in a hurry with a deadline approaching, go with latex and practice some Typst on the side.
I’ve used it for a few documents and loved it. There’s a learning curve, but I’m glad they’re not carrying the technical debt latex has, so it’s definitely worth the effort IMO.
I think it’s just a larger undertaking. Like mentioned in the last comments. People either need to address that as the main focus for some new major release and work on it. Or subdivide it and find people to work on the individual components to make it happen (gradually).
Also there is always the thing with hobby / free software projects. Sometimes people focus on functionality and features and not so much on asthetics and the first impression. I agree the welcome screen is somewhat important as it’s the first thing a new player sees. But I also like the developers to work on features which enhance the actual gameplay because I just see that screen for 10 seconds and it’s kind of a waste of time to improve it for someone like me. The current screen works alright. There are several dynamics affecting projects: “Perfect is the enemy of good” (don’t make it too complicated) but also sometimes a makeshift solution or something that works “okay” stays inplace indefinitely because “it works” and people concentrate on other stuff. That’s just how things work. It takes deliberate effort to work against those dynamics.
So I’d say the cause is, their focus is somewhere else.
I use helium314/openboard on day to day basis, but the few times I use termux or have to ssh a linux box from my phone, unexpected keyboard is really awesome.
github.com
Active