Is Typst mature enough to be used for academic purposes?

General
1

I am a researcher in academia. I have been using LaTeX for some years, then switched to Quarto (I program in R). While definitely useful, I feel like Quarto wants to be liked by too many people, so for those in academia it might not be the perfect fit.

I have been looking into Typst, which seems great. Before trying it for an actual paper, I want to ask a few questions. This is the setting:

  • I want to have a project (eg, a new paper) including a main text which contains both text and, at the end, bibliography and tables.
  • It also includes a separate file for supplementary information, which contains text, supplementary tables/figures.
  • A directory containing all figures for the main text.

My needs are as follows:

  • Is it possible (and easy to do so) to insert cross-references in the main text for tables inserted at the end of the document?
  • Is it possible (and easy to do so) to insert cross-references in the main text for tables/figures from the supplementary information file?
  • While for figures the workflow is standard (R to file to Typst), I am worried about tables (which I find difficult also in Quarto to PDF). I tend to create all my tables with R (eg, gtsummary or tinytable), and save them to file. Has anyone used this workflow before? Are the tables rendered well. It does not matter how much I try, with Quarto/PDF they all go out of margins…

Before saying “use Quarto and output to Typst”, I’d rather use a single tool and ditch Quarto for good.

2

Hello. Since IJIMAI and JUTI journals accept submissions in Typst, I think it means that it is mature enough for this.

Here is how I read your spec list:

#let bib = ```yaml
key:
  type: article
  title: Title
  author: Author
```.text

#set page(margin: 1cm)
#set par(justify: true)

= Main text
#lorem(20) @key

@a @this

// #figure(image("figures/this"), caption: [Caption 1]) <this>
#figure(rect(), caption: [Caption 1]) <this>

// #figure(image("figures/that"), caption: [Caption 2]) <that>
#figure(rect(), caption: [Caption 2]) <that>

#lorem(30) @b @that

Supplementary references: @c, @fig:j, @d, @fig:i.

// #bibliography("bibfile")
#bibliography(bytes(bib))

#figure(table(columns: 2, rows: 2), caption: [First]) <a>

#figure(table(columns: 8, rows: 4), caption: [Second]) <b>

// #include "supplementary.typ"
= Supplementary file
#lorem(20) @c @fig:j

// #figure(image("figures/sup1"), caption: [Caption 10]) <this>
#figure(rect(), caption: [Caption 10]) <fig:j>

// #figure(image("figures/sup2"), caption: [Caption 20]) <that>
#figure(rect(), caption: [Caption 20]) <fig:i>

#lorem(30) @d @fig:i

// #figure(image("figures/table.svg"), kind: table, caption: [a table])
#figure(table(columns: 2, rows: 2), caption: [Another one]) <c>

#figure(table(columns: 8, rows: 4), caption: [And another one]) <d>

image
image742Ă—1041 86.3 KB

So, yes & yes?

Since you don’t provide any sources this is impossible to answer for me.

Use Typst. Including table creation. CSV Function – Typst Documentation

3 Likes
3

I use Typst professionally, so to speak. In the sense that I use it daily for my writing. I find that it has improved my workflow speed by several orders of magnitude. However, I am mainly writing mathematics, so a neater syntax will obviously help. In other cases, it might not be as good of an improvement. Slides are also another thing that are really good in Typst, way faster to compile than a beamer template :slight_smile:. Although, some people have already been using quarto for that purpose.

Other than speed, there are obviously other concerns like whether editors will accept your manuscript at all. In that case, I will say that Typst is not mature enough. Clearly, no one is explictly accepting Typst sources. However, if no one starts using them or ask for them, then how can that situation improve?

The best way to decide whether Typst fits your needs, is to test it. There are many edge cases you will have missed if you did not try to reproduce one of your publications in Typst. Some things are easier, some are harder, e.g., multiple bibliographies.

As for tinytables, the Typst writer is pretty new, and less flexible according to the documentation. For simple tables, it will give a good output. There is no way to know whether it will fit your needs without knowing what kind of table you want.

image
image1324Ă—1344 90.6 KB

2 Likes
4

I wouldn’t say that that is harder, it’s just not built-in. alexandria – Typst Universe makes it pretty easy.

5

There are several limitations to Alexandria outlined in the manual that make it harder to use it for specific use cases. It is harder in that sense.