Which one is always acceptable: "i.e." or "i.e.," [duplicate]

I had made an native English check before proof reading of my article. The native check company had changed all "i.e.," and "e.g.," to "i.e." and "e.g." in the article. When the publisher made an English proof by themselves they changed all "i.e." and "e.g." to "i.e.," and "e.g.," in the final article.

Now I am wondering which is actually always acceptable. This may be an duplicate question of Should I always use a comma after "e.g." or "i.e."? But I found that it varies from publisher to publisher depending on the style they use.

So my question is why does it vary in different English writing styles. What are the differences? What's good or bad whether or not use a comma after i.e. or e.g.?

This question was explored here: Should there be a comma after "i.e."?

I proofread manuscripts for submission to scientific journals for a living, and I can confirm the following answer from Mehper C. Palavuzlar:

Some books & journals use American English, while some use British English. In the American style of writing, a comma is inserted before and after i.e. However, in the British style of writing, a comma is inserted before but not after i.e.

It could be that your proofreader applied British English (preferred by many European journals) because you failed to mention that you were submitting to an American journal.

In addition, there is no strict rule about it and each journal editor has personal preferences, which become part of the journal's house style. As in your case, the publisher may edit your punctuation to fit this house style, or they may not bother if they don't consider this top priority.