X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3C270D48.321104FF@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Mon, 24 Dec 2001 11:11:04 +0000
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: djgpp: djgpp/src/docs/kb/develop.txi
References:	<200112202012 DOT fBKKC3818592 AT delorie DOT com> <3C25BF72 DOT EEA70893 AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <3C265223 DOT BF946F26 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3C26CFBE DOT BEE17DC3 AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> I thought "e.g." should be followed by a comma, but "i.e." should not
> (and thus requires @: in Texinfo).

I'd forgotten that we had some grammar books, so I had used the somewhat
unreliable web. The Oxford Library of English Usage, book III, has the
following entry:

"4. It is naturally proceeded by a stop; it should not be followed by a
comma unless the sense requires one, to introduce a parenthesis for
instance. /He attacked reactionaries, i.e. those whose opinions differed
from his own/, but /He attacked reactionaries, i.e., it would seem, those
whose opinions, etc./"

This is British English grammar, but I doubt (and hope) that American
English grammar is that different.

The second example, the one with the comma after "i.e.", doesn't seem like
a proper sentence to me.

I'll add a note about commas after "e.g." and @: after "i.e." to
develop.txi.

Thanks, bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -