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

[John Renish <John_F_Renish -at- NOTES -dot- SEAGATE -dot- COM>]

Janice Gelb wrote:
<snip>
> [John Renish] wrote:
> FWIW, the famous Sun style guide permits both these abbreviations.
We do?
</snip>
In my old internal version, they're rated as "G--suitable for all
audiences".

David Dvorkin wrote:
<snip>
> [John Renish] wrote:
> It is difficult to justify _ever_ using 'i.e.', though, because if you
> write it right the first time you don't have to explain what you mean.
Not really true.  The clause introduced by "i.e." or "that is" may add
further useful detail to the preceding clause.
</snip>
Certainly I had considered that possibility; my original post was just a
little bit tongue in cheek because it is _nearly_ always unnecessary and
inappropriate to use i.e. Not to pick on anybody--this is after all an
informal venue where we generally don't write as carefully as we do for our
jobs--here are the only examples of i.e. I could find in recent techwr-l
digests:
As written:
The primary purpose of [requirements specification... big text based
document] is not to clarify but to mystify (i.e. read job security).
Better:
The primary purpose of [requirements specification... big text based
document] is to provide job security by mystifying the audience.
As written:
I know that some people, including myself, said that we are not primarily
technical people, i.e., engineers and programmers.
Better:
I know that some people, including me, said that we are not primarily
engineers and programmers.
John_F_Renish -at- notes -dot- seagate -dot- com, San Jose, California, USA
My comments represent my personal views and not those of my employer.
"How'm I gonna do decent pictures when all my good writers are in jail?
...Don't misunderstand me, they all ought to be hung."
--Samuel Goldwyn