1. The line spacing. It's not defined as baseline to baseline, but as the space inbetween two lines of text. Very difficult for an assignment with a prescribed line height since it usually refers to a baseline-baseline measure. 2. While having multiple columns is really easy, adding floating elements for the text to wrap around seems not possible. There's a reason all these CV templates have the info bar on the right instead of the left.
Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
31–40 of 243 posts
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#32This is neat. I've used Latex before, and it definitely suffers from poor ergonomics. Both the language and tooling contribute to this. The selling point seems to be that this is more similar to Markdown. That makes sense, Markdown is objectively more common and has more users than Latex. I've used both, but Markdown way more often. Here's something I don't understand: it would be trivial to make Typst even more simi…
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#33This is neat. I've used Latex before, and it definitely suffers from poor ergonomics. Both the language and tooling contribute to this. The selling point seems to be that this is more similar to Markdown. That makes sense, Markdown is objectively more common and has more users than Latex. I've used both, but Markdown way more often. Here's something I don't understand: it would be trivial to make Typst even more simi…
> The selling point seems to be that this is more similar to Markdown. The problem is that extending Markdown syntax gets messy. #figure( image("image.jpg", width: 70%), caption: [ Observe the image in the picture ], ) This is kind of a strange blend of Markdown, CSS, JSON, and HTML. TeX at least has a consistent syntax.
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#34Does Typst have epub or html export?
Both are on the roadmap, apparently. https://github.com/typst/typst/issues/188#issuecomment-14933...
Many open source projects put “we should make our system accessible to disabled vision issues” on the roadmap, depressingly few projects then actually do it.
Even latex, which in academic circles is famous for not having html output, nowadays produces more accessible output than typist.
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#35Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#36Previous discussions about Typst. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41014941 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38354422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38047224 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35250210 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34423590
Thanks! Macroexpanded: Typst: An easy to learn alternative for LaTex - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41014941 - July 2024 (187 comments) Building the New Hypermedia Systems using Typst - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40986352 - July 2024 (1 comment) No-Signup Typst Tools - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40905678 - July 2024 (1 comment) Typst Symbol Classifier - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id…
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#37I've been looking into it. It's `blazingly fast` (aside from the rust joke, it really is way faster than latex), the syntax is more "modern", consistent, etc. The main problem is the popularity. It just does not have enough packages, at least for my use case. I mainly do a lot of equations (simple math), and a loooot of tikz (forest, circuitikz, pgfplots, etc.) [ https://gitlab.com/vslavkin/escuela/-/tree/main/5to?re…
This is tangential, but have you any quick tips for someone looking to get started with AucTeX? I'm a comfortable Emacser who has started to occasionally think of some document I'd like to do in LaTeX (some maths questions for a student, or an overview of some topic). I've looked at AucTeX once or twice, and ran away thinking, oh, I'll do that some other time.
What is the order of events? Should I make a few really basic LaTeX documents first with a terminal, and then try AucTeX?
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#38It's:
- Fast—Compiling my books would take around 1 minute (I often had to compile twice due to indexing). With Typst, it takes less than 5 seconds.
- Easy to write—I actually don't write it, I wrote a bunch of Pandoc plugins to tweak the output from Pandoc (I write all my books in Jupyter these days, so lots of markdown).
- Easy to read—I've used LaTeX for years (and wrote a bunch of tooling around it) and still couldn't tell you when to use a { or a [. Typst is very readable.
- Easy to script—Okay, I did write some Typst the other day. I migrated my LaTeX-based invoicing system to Typst. I created a list of objects with pricing and count and was able to throw it into a table easily. It has less code than my LaTeX version, which was using a library, and is easier to read. (I did need to write a function to properly format $ because that doesn't exist. A few rounds with AI made that easy.)
- Has great error messages—If you've used LaTeX, you know what I mean.
My needs are different from others, but I'm writing PDFs that need to be printed into a real book that looks professional. This includes front matter, footnotes, callouts, page numbers, page headers and footers, and indexes. I don't do a lot of math-heavy stuff, so I can't comment on that. And the widow/orphan support is a little weak.
Otherwise, I'm happy to never use LaTeX again!
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#39This is neat. I've used Latex before, and it definitely suffers from poor ergonomics. Both the language and tooling contribute to this. The selling point seems to be that this is more similar to Markdown. That makes sense, Markdown is objectively more common and has more users than Latex. I've used both, but Markdown way more often. Here's something I don't understand: it would be trivial to make Typst even more simi…
Re: Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX
#40So Typst has its own styling system, and its own scripting system, and plugin system via WASM... isn't this just HTML with extra steps? Not to mention that Typst doesn't support HTML export https://github.com/typst/typst/issues/188#issuecomment-14933..., which is a major impediment to vision-impaired accessibility in the academic community.
I think this is all a bit of a shame that there's been no major efforts to reform HTML as the go-to file format for scientific publishing instead. All the elements are there - , citation.js, KaTex, Web Components, good plotting libraries (Observable Plot), WASM. Was all this extra engineering effort required to get us a Markdown style syntax? I know people hate XML-based markup... but it's not _that_ bad, right?