Joshua Slive wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 7:24 AM, Nick Kew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 22:29:36 -0400
Chris Pepper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Vincent Bray wrote:
> > On 17/04/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> + situation, <em>e.g.,</em> adding the <code>[PT]</code> flag
> >> if
> >
> > Why emphasise "e.g." throughout this patch? I don't see how that's
> > correct or useful.
>
> Because it's normally italicized in English.
Really? Not IME.
Garner's Dictionary of Modern American Usage suggests it should be unitalicized.
I have seen it consistently italicized in print, presumably because
it's a non-English import, and I typically see untranslated words
italicized. I don't use <i> because back in the Before Time, there was
much ranting and gnashing of teeth over presentational markup, and I got
in the habit of <strong> & <em> instead of <b> & <i>.
http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/ie-eg-oh-my.aspx
I hope to do some more review on that doc (all 3 versions) tonight, and
will back out the <em>s soon.
Chris
--
Chris Pepper: <http://www.reppep.com/~pepper/>
<http://www.extrapepperoni.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
