Reformat the list of math and trigo functions

[gmantele]

Following the recommendation by @msdemlei during the RFC for 2.1, the tables for math and trigo functions have been converted into lists. A sub-sub-section has been added to clearly split the two lists.

Fixes #93

[mbtaylor]

I'm not sure that this is more readable than the previous table-based formatting, but it doesn't look wrong.

[gmantele]

I do not know either if it is more readable. The table version was OK according to me because more compact and still readable.

[gmantele]

However, about your commit @mbtaylor , it is "quite" OK for the HTML, but not anymore in the PDF. I put the semi-colon outside the \item[...] because of this. When it is outside, it looks great in the PDF.

And anyway, even with the semi-colon inside, the rendering is not that great in the HTML version. I guess one should fix the CSS for the HTML version so that definition lists look much better than that. @msdemlei , is it OK if I propose few CSS lines to fix the rendering in HTML? Should it be in ivoatex or somewhere else (I see that styles are coming from here: https://www.ivoa.net/misc/ivoa_doc.css)?

[gmantele]

An alternative would be to format the list of functions differently. Before this version, I tried with only definition lists but multiple level of such lists is apparently badly converted from tex to pdf. I also tried with only standard lists, but I did not like the rendering. If anyone has a better idea, I can try it.

[mbtaylor]

Sorry about that, I added some \mbox{}s to fix up the PDF rendering again, I'd say it's now better than a couple of commits ago in both PDF and HTML. However if you want to either back out of either/both of my commits or back out of this PR altogether and go back to tables or do some other formatting, that's fine by me.

[msdemlei]

On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 09:36:29AM +0000, Grégory Mantelet wrote: gmantele left a comment (ivoa-std/ADQL#107) And anyway, even with the semi-colon inside, the rendering is not that great in the HTML version. I guess one should fix the CSS for the HTML version so that definition lists look much better than that. @msdemlei , is it OK if I propose few CSS lines to fix the rendering in HTML? Should it be in ivoatex or somewhere else (I see that styles are coming from here: https://www.ivoa.net/misc/ivoa_doc.css)?

ivoa_doc.css is not under ivoatex's control, but thankfully it's not at least under version control: https://github.com/ivoa/ivoa-web, ./current-html/misc/ivoa_doc.css. Better table rendering is certainly a good thing, so +1 from me. I'm not sure who gets to review this right now. If you do a PR, that'll be a good excuse for me to pester the exec about quicker ivoa-web reviews.