Re: [Raw] Roman Danyliw's Discuss on draft-ietf-raw-use-cases-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <[e-mail]>]

OK, thanks for the note.

Carlos

On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 4:00 PM John Scudder <[e-mail]> wrote:

> One brief reply --
>
> > On Nov 29, 2022, at 5:46 PM, CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > ** Section 3.1.
> >    Such
> >    deployment is a mix between industrial automation (i.e., Smart
> >    Factories) and multimedia entertainment applications.
> >
> > In what way is “industrial automation” and “Smart Factories” the same in
> this
> > example?  One seems to connote automation of operational technology (as
> opposed
> > to IT).  The other seems to be a marketing term for OT building things –
> I’m
> > not sure.
> >
> > [Carlos] We used the terms not to be synonyms.
>
> My bad for not catching this in my review — “i.e.” is the Latin “id est”
> or in English, “that is”, you can casually expand it as “in other words”.
> So even though you intended that “Smart Factories” should be an example,
> what you mistakenly wrote was that it is a synonym. What you wanted was
> “e.g.” which indicates an example.
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/ie-vs-eg-abbreviation-meaning-usage-difference
>
> I often guide people to avoid using either “i.e.” or “e.g.” because of
> this common confusion, and instead to write out “in other words” or “for
> example”.
>
> (And yes, removing the entire parenthetical comment would be a fine fix.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> —John