# Making enumeration item look better

if the following two conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(a, b_1) \in R \wedge (a, b_3) \in R \Rightarrow (a, b_2) \in R$
for all $a \in S_i, b_1, b_2, b_3 \in S_j$ with $b_1 < b_2 < b_3$.
\item $(a_1, b_2) \in R \wedge (a_2, b_1) \in R \Rightarrow (a_1, b_1) \in R \wedge (a_2, b_2) \in R$
for all $a_1, a_2 \in S_i, b_1, b_2 \in S_j$ with $a_1 < a_2$ and $b_1 < b_2$.
\end{enumerate}


How can one make this look not so stuffed?

• Welcome to TeX.SX! Please make your code compilable (if possible), or at least complete it with \documentclass{...}, the required \usepackage's, \begin{document}, and \end{document}. That may seem tedious to you, but think of the extra work it represents for TeX.SX users willing to give you a hand. Help them help you: remove that one hurdle between you and a solution to your problem. – Thruston Mar 9 '16 at 17:47

You're requesting something that's very subjective. It doesn't look stuffed to me, as long as you're using the appropriate terminology and/or definitions. Perhaps using words instead of symbols will allow for things looking less stuffed:

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{amsmath}

\begin{document}

\noindent
If the following two conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(a, b_1) \in R \wedge (a, b_3) \in R \Rightarrow (a, b_2) \in R$
for all $a \in S_i, b_1, b_2, b_3 \in S_j$ with $b_1 < b_2 < b_3$.

\item $(a_1, b_2) \in R \wedge (a_2, b_1) \in R \Rightarrow (a_1, b_1) \in R \wedge (a_2, b_2) \in R$
for all $a_1, a_2 \in S_i, b_1, b_2 \in S_j$ with $a_1 < a_2$ and $b_1 < b_2$.
\end{enumerate}

\noindent
If the following two conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\bigl( (a, b_1) \in R \bigr) \wedge \bigl( (a, b_3) \in R \bigr) \Rightarrow (a, b_2) \in R$
for all $a \in S_i$ and $b_1, b_2, b_3 \in S_j$ with $b_1 < b_2 < b_3$.

\item $\bigl( (a_1, b_2) \in R \bigr) \wedge \bigl( (a_2, b_1) \in R \bigr) \Rightarrow \bigl( (a_1, b_1) \in R \bigr) \wedge \bigl( (a_2, b_2) \in R \bigr)$
for all $a_1, a_2 \in S_i$ and $b_1, b_2 \in S_j$ with $a_1 < a_2$ and $b_1 < b_2$.
\end{enumerate}

\noindent
If the following two conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\bigl( (a, b_1) \in R \bigr)$ and $\bigl( (a, b_3) \in R \bigr)$ implies that $(a, b_2) \in R$
for all $a \in S_i$ and $b_1, b_2, b_3 \in S_j$ with $b_1 < b_2 < b_3$.

\item $\bigl( (a_1, b_2) \in R \bigr)$ and $\bigl( (a_2, b_1) \in R \bigr)$ implies that $\bigl( (a_1, b_1) \in R \bigr)$ and $\bigl( (a_2, b_2) \in R \bigr)$
for all $a_1, a_2 \in S_i$ and $b_1, b_2 \in S_j$ with $a_1 < a_2$ and $b_1 < b_2$.
\end{enumerate}

\end{document}


I'd advise against adjusting the inter-word spacing just for the sake of this list.

I propose to separate the ‘pure maths’ and the ‘mixed text-math’ on two different lines, the mixed part being right-aligned while beginning at the same place (see image):

\documentclass[a4paper,11pt]{book}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{lmodern}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\usepackage{eqparbox}

\begin{document}

if the following two conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(a, b_1) \in R \wedge (a, b_3) \in R \Rightarrow (a, b_2) \in R$\\[-1.5\baselineskip]
\begin{flushright}\eqmakebox[B][l]{%æ
for all $a \in S_i$ and all $b_1, b_2, b_3 \in S_j$ with $b_1 < b_2 < b_3$.}\end{flushright}
\item $(a_1, b_2) \in R \wedge (a_2, b_1) \in R \Rightarrow (a_1, b_1) \in R \wedge (a_2, b_2) \in R$ \\[-1.5\baselineskip]
\begin{flushright}\eqmakebox[B] [l]{for all $a_1, a_2 \in S_i$ and all $b_1, b_2 \in S_j$ with $a_1 < a_2$ and $b_1 < b_2$.}\end{flushright}
\end{enumerate}

\end{document}