I've heard "EPS is a dying format" so many times my brain completes the sentence every time I hear "EPS"...yet whenever I research the issue, I can only find posts about why it's a dying format in 2012, 2008, 2002, etc. (And yet it seems to have not died yet, imagine that.) I am not using software from 5 years ago and the quirks and limitations of Illustrator CS2 or whatever are irrelevant to me.
As a marketing designer, I often have to deal a lot with sponsor logos that go onto printed collateral. I repeat myself ad nauseam about what kind of file format I want them in, and the short answer I tell people is "EPS with all text converted to outlines." (It never seems to be designers giving specs directly to other designers, but designers giving specs to marketers who are giving specs to other marketers who are MAYBE giving the specs to their designers, and trying to get the message distorted as little as possible in transit while also trying to make it comprehensible to the lowest common denominator.)
I specify EPS because 1. it seems to be the answer most likely to get me an actual vector file with nothing extraneous in it, and 2. when placing an EPS into InDesign, InDesign places the object with the bounds conformed to the edges of the artwork, not the edges of the canvas. As far as I can tell, this has to do with the default settings for saving EPS and AI files and nothing to do with how I'm placing it, but it's important to me for managing spacing and alignment.
So what I'm wondering is if EPS really is inferior to AI for reasons I haven't noticed yet that are still relevant in 2017 and there's some good reason why I shouldn't be asking for EPS, or if all this "EPS is a dying format" dogma is something that was more pertinent in previous versions of the Adobe software?
P.S. I refuse to ask for a PDF, as getting an actual vector in one seems to be a complete coin toss, and trying to explain to marketers how a PDF can be either a vector OR a raster image ("What's a raster image??") is a complete nightmare.