Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > We are inconsistently about adding a comma after e.g. and i.e.:
> This summarizes the recommended behavior: > https://jakubmarian.com/comma-after-i-e-and-e-g/ > In British English, “i.e.” and “e.g.” are not followed by a comma, so > the first example above would be: > They sell computer components, e.g. motherboards, graphic > cards, CPUs. > Virtually all American style guides recommend to follow both “i.e.” and > “e.g.” with a comma (just like if “that is” and “for example” were used > instead), so the very same sentence in American English would become: > So, what do we want to do? Leave it unchanged, or pick one of these > styles? I think it's fairly pointless to try to enforce such a thing. Even if you made the docs 100% consistent on the issue today, they wouldn't stay that way for long, because nobody else is really going to care about it. (FWIW, I generally write a comma myself. But I'm not going to cry about text that hasn't got one.) regards, tom lane
