|
|
|
|
|
by ossner
266 days ago
|
|
The crucial component for the success of this, in my opinion, is the acceptance of Typst templates in scientific journals and conferences. The adoption of something like this in universities relies entirely on the adoption by these publishers. I see almost no support in the scientific community for Typst since everyone already has a LaTeX template for a thesis, paper, slides, etc. Researchers need to take the initiative and create a template that is accepted by first a chair, then propagate it in the university and try and get it popular enough so that it hopefully forces the creation of templates for conferences and journals. This is an incredibly long, tedious, (and I am guessing ongoing) process, but one that is crucial for Typst to be a real contender with LaTeX |
|
I absolutely get the importance of typesetting for people who publish physical books/magazines/etc, but when it comes to research I don't see the value of typsetting anything. Journals or print publishers should be responsible for typsetting submissions to fit their style/paper size/etc, and researchers should just be responsible for delivering their research in a format that's simpler and more content focused.