I have just taken a look to the syntax.
It is pretty close to djot [1].
Of course Typst is more powerful than djot.
One noticeable difference is the chosen markup for headers (`=` instead of `#`).
This could be nice to reduce differences and make Typst a close-to superset of djot.
Note for the authors: I have just taken a look to the syntax. It is pretty close to djot [1]. Of course Typst is more powerful than djot. One noticeable difference is the chosen markup for headers (`=` instead of `#`). This could be nice to reduce differences and make Typst a close-to superset of djot. [1] https://www.djot.net
We have switched back and forth on this because we also wanted to stay as close to Markdown as possible, just for the familiarity. However, the fact that Typst also uses the hashtag to indicate an inline expression led to too much confusion (`#thing` was a variable access and `# thing` a heading). And the hashtag is really quite nice for these inline expressions, so it won over the headings. Using `=` for them does have some precedent with AsciiDoc.
Impressive, as a Master's thesis, but also as a long-term project. I've been recently working on a book project, and I've reviewed all the tools available. My current conclusion is that I found nothing that would combine the simplicity of Markdown or Asciidoc with the typographical control of LaTeX. This project seems to hit the sweet spot. Is the source code of the thesis available somewhere? Of other works created…
I've been working on something somewhat similar for producing legal documents, called Linked Markdown (https://linked.md). So the section about modules/importing and dynamic references really rang a bell. Very cool stuff, will keep track of progress.
How do you handle citations and citation styles? Was scanning the thesis but could find any hints?
For the purposes of this thesis I coded the citation style and numbering using Typst's introspection system and handwrote the references. However, we have also written a BibLaTeX-compatible citation system called hayagriva [1] for Typst. We haven't yet integrated it, but want to do so before our public beta.
I'm in the beta and it's really nice. It's still missing some important features (references is the main thing for me) but once they arrive I doubt I will ever go back to latex.
As far as I can tell it compiles directly to pdf, which seems a non-starter for submitting to many journals which accept either latex or word documents. This would need various compiler backends (perhaps via pandoc) to be that useful. Certainly it would help adoption if you could emit, eg., markdown/latex/etc. and others you're working with wouldn't need to adopt your tooling.
Markdown is not close to powerful enough to produce all the stuff that Typst can produce, and emitting latex would be a massive technical effort. I think the best hope is that whatever journals currently only accept latex or .docx will start accepting typst files (or at least pdf).
I really like the paper, though I'm not sure the world needs another Turing-complete document language however well-motivated ;) As SGML pedant however, I can't resist commenting on the following: > The second offspring of SGML is XML, specified by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) in 1998. It has a reduced feature set compared to SGML (for example, it forbids unclosed tags and concurrent markup). But it retains th…
>I really like the paper, though I'm not sure the world needs another Turing-complete document language however well-motivated ;)
What would you recommend instead? From my experience of the beta it is vastly nicer to use than latex, and I'm not really aware of any other competition.