I’m not sure if this should go in another category or not, but has the Typst team had a discussion with the arXiv maintainers about what would be needed to get experimental support for Typst submissions to arXiv?
I think the arXiv team is reasonably fairly conservative with changes, but it would be pretty amazing from a workflow perspective and I think really unlock a lot of academic use of Typst in general.
You can already upload Typst-generated PDFs on arXiv/HAL, right? However I guess that these preprint platforms need Latex sources if you want advanced features such as author/bibliography automatic scanning or watermark integration in the margins or first page. As far as I’m concerned, I don’t have a strong need for these features at the moment.
This is really not desirable in any way. There is substantial benefit in the arXiv not only being the center of scientific discourse but also being a public archive for the generating source materials.
As far as I’m concerned, I don’t have a strong need for these features at the moment.
Good for you, but that’s not relevant to this topic.
Sorry, but I struggle to understand the particular need you want to fulfill regarding arXiv. Apart from having the arXiv watermark on the PDF, what would be the other advantages of being able to send Typst sources to arXiv? I’m genuinely curious.
arXiv’s FAQ explains why they want the TeX source over PDFs: Requiring TeX when possible - arXiv info
While the article is about TeX and not typst, I’d imagine the reasons for preferring typst sources over PDFs (if/when typst is supported) would be would be the same.
As far as I know, there has been no official attempt to reach out to them on side of the Typst team. There was someone on Reddit who has tried reaching out a year ago, though.