updates examples/intel_extension_for_pytorch README

[min-jean-cho]

This PR updates examples/intel_extension_for_pytorch README -- fixes few typos, wordings, and updates IPEX int8 API

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1816 (2acfd90) into master (a916ee5) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1816   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   45.28%   45.28%           
=======================================
  Files          64       64           
  Lines        2597     2597           
  Branches       60       60           
=======================================
  Hits         1176     1176           
  Misses       1421     1421           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[min-jean-cho]

Hi @msaroufim, please help review this PR. Thanks!

[agunapal]

@min-jean-cho I have a general comment/question about the changes.
Why don't we say intel-extension-for-pytorch (IPEX) and then use IPEX everywhere else?
The code is still using ipex for short. So, that would keep the format consistent

[min-jean-cho]

@min-jean-cho I have a general comment/question about the changes. Why don't we say intel-extension-for-pytorch (IPEX) and then use IPEX everywhere else? The code is still using ipex for short. So, that would keep the format consistent

Thanks @agunapal, we don't want to use IPEX in formal docs. cc @jingxu10

[jingxu10]

Hi @agunapal, as we got instructed from Intel Legal, Intel® Extension for PyTorch* is a TM&B. We must use this exactly the same text when mentioning it in docs or reading materials.

[agunapal]

Thanks @min-jean-cho and @jingxu10 for the context