Re: i.e. vs e.g.

Subject: Re: i.e. vs e.g.
From: Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:23:48 -0700

OK.... after consulting the M$ Manual of Style, I capitulate.

Pg. 310 * i.e.* Abbreviation for *id est*, meaning "that is." Do not use.
Use *that is* instead.
Pg. 284 *e.g. *Abbreviation for *exempli gratia*, meaning for example. Do
not use. Use *for example* instead.

Not that this style guide is gospel, but it's worthy of consideration,
especially in view of all of the other comments.

> Chris

On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Lauren <lauren -at- writeco -dot- net> wrote:

> On 4/13/2012 1:08 PM, Bruce Megan (ST-CO/ENS2.5-NA) wrote:
>
>> Could you expound ;-)
>>
>> For technical documentation, it may be better for me to use the
>> abbreviations, due to the length of the documents.
>>
>
> That is a good consideration for word counts and printing costs, but the
> abbreviations may be more awkward to read than whole words. What does the
> voice in your head tell you? Not like voices, but the reading voice. One
> test for readability is to read a document out loud and see what feels
> better to say. When I see, "i.e.," I wonder what to say, since I speak
> English and i.e. is not English. Do I say the letters? That always seems
> wrong to me. I want documents to clearly say what they mean.
>
> I avoid using abbreviations and say things like, "like," "for example,"
> "similar to," "such as," "that include," and a few others depending on what
> is appropriate for the document and whether the document requires
> repetition of the same phrase or a variety of phrases to state the same
> thing to avoid monotony.
>
> "Like" is generally informal and "such as" is generally overused, but each
> has their place in documentation at times. I do avoid using "including,"
> and instead state "that include."
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^**^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with
> Doc-To-Help. Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need.
>
> Try Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days.
>
> http://bit.ly/doc-to-help
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^**^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
>
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- **com <techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> http://www.techwhirl.com/**email-discussion-groups/<http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/>for more resources and info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online
> magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
>

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help. Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need.

Try Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days.

http://bit.ly/doc-to-help

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


References:
i.e. vs e.g.: From: Bruce Megan (ST-CO/ENS2.5-NA)
Re: i.e. vs e.g.: From: Chris Morton
RE: i.e. vs e.g.: From: Bruce Megan (ST-CO/ENS2.5-NA)
Re: i.e. vs e.g.: From: Chris Morton
RE: i.e. vs e.g.: From: Porrello, Leonard
Re: i.e. vs e.g.: From: Chris Morton
RE: i.e. vs e.g.: From: Bruce Megan (ST-CO/ENS2.5-NA)
Re: i.e. vs e.g.: From: Lauren

Previous by Author: Re: i.e. vs e.g.
Next by Author: Re: i.e. vs e.g.
Previous by Thread: Re: i.e. vs e.g.
Next by Thread: Re: i.e. vs e.g.


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads