Re: Correct usage "i.e." and "e.g." ?

[sng <sngotler -at- GOTLER -dot- COM>]

A recent client required me to use the following terms:
- Instead of "i.e.,", use "that is,"
- Instead of "e.g.," use "for example,"

I really like the way this turned out. It generates much more readable
text.

He reasoned that the abbreviated terms were useful in an era when writers
had to write with their hands and when printers had to manually set up
their presses. They saved a lot of time. In this day of word processors,
there is little argument left for using them, unless you just want to
confuse and slow down your readers. If you don't want to type the words
out, define macros to do it for you.

----------
From:   Bob Morrisette
Sent:   Wednesday, May 06, 1998 11:03 AM
To:     TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Subject:        Re: Correct usage "i.e." and "e.g." ?

From: Justin Moss <Justin_Moss -at- RTA -dot- NSW -dot- GOV -dot- AU>

>Would you mind giving me your impression of the 'correct' usage of these
>abbreviations ?

My advice is - don't use them. They don't translate well and many
people don't know what thay mean. Most style guides outlaw the terms.

Bob Morrisette
writer1 -at- sabu -dot- Eng -dot- Sun -dot- com