A lot of older posts that I come across have their reactions written like:
$$\ce{Cu(NO3)2_{(aq)} + 2NaHCO3_{(s)} -> CuCO3_{(s)} + 2NaNO3_{(aq)} + H2O_{(l)} + CO2_{(g)}}$$
($$\ce{Cu(NO3)2_{(aq)} + 2NaHCO3_{(s)} -> CuCO3_{(s)} + 2NaNO3_{(aq)} + H2O_{(l)} + CO2_{(g)}}$$
)
I just go ahead and remove the subscript to convert it into:
$$\ce{Cu(NO3)2 (aq) + 2NaHCO3 (s) -> CuCO3 (s) + 2NaNO3 (aq) + H2O (l) + CO2 (g)}$$
($$\ce{Cu(NO3)2 (aq) + 2NaHCO3 (s) -> CuCO3 (s) + 2NaNO3 (aq) + H2O (l) + CO2 (g)}$$
)
i.e. convert the phases of matter from subscript to inline text.
I didn't find any meta question related to this already, and I am not sure which book to look into either. Is the subscript notation discouraged? Or is it actually the standard notation instead? I don't know, but I've almost always seen the latter being used in both my books or on the Internet.