Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > At the same time a lot of "i.e. foo" were changed to "i.e., foo". > I don't know if that's correct, but it struck me as odd. It is correct. It makes sense if you think of replacing these Latin abbreviations with English equivalents. For example, if you write a sentence like this one, that is, without "e.g." and "i.e.", the commas make sense. --Bob