← Back to context

Comment by satvikpendem

1 day ago

They know, hence why they used e.g., i.e. exempli gratia

I don't think that's really clear. I think we could both defer to the OP clarifying.

For pedantry's sake: neither i.e. nor e.g. would be correct here. You want cf. ("conferatur") to invite a comparison; e.g. is when an example pertains to an instance. In this case uv would not pertain to the instance, because Astro is not Astral.

  • cf. would invite a fair bit of confusion on an article about cloudflare

    • I agree! That's why I think it's probably just a confusion between entities. It doesn't make sense either as example or as a comparison (although IMO it makes more sense as the latter).

      (For the OP: I'm sorry if I misinterpreted you.)

      1 reply →

  • "e.g." IS correct because uv is an example or instance of a dev tool.

    • "e.g." isn't used correctly here. It's intended use is as a connector linking a clause to examples supporting that clause. You can't simply substitute "for example" with "e.g." anywhere in a sentence and expect it to function correctly.

      Regardless, these Latin abbreviations best avoided entirely due to the surprising number of readers who don't understand them.

For the perplex:

e.g. is latin for "exempli gratia" = for example i.e. is latin for "id est" = that is

  • As someone who was perplexed, I've only heard perplex used in past tense (I was perplexed) so seeing "For the perplex" just made me confused as to what "perplex" meant and I had to do a further search to decipher this tree of comments haha

I'm not sure. I wouldn't generally call Astro a "dev tool". It's more of a framework.

It's possible you are right, but it isn't clear from the content of the comment.

  • Frameworks are a category of development tool. Things that developers utilitise to be productive.

    • IMO saying a framework is a dev tool is like saying a cake mix is a cooking tool, because it allows you to be more productive when making a cake. Sure, if you look at it a certain way, it is correct. But that isn't the way the term is usually used.