At the time that text was written, the list of names was actually created exhaustively from those who had contributed to the document - through PRs or participating in discussions. "And the rest of the AB" was an acknowledgement of the rest of the AB's implicit contribution through supporting the idea of the work; it was certainly not intended to be disrespectful or ingracious, and I don't think anyone took it as such.

How do you think we should identify the names that should be acknowledged?

How do you think we should identify the names that should be acknowledged?

This is always a tricky question. The approach I prefer is to identify anyone who has contributed through PRs or participating in discussions, so I think that's just trying to do that regularly. I know there are plenty of groups that set a higher bar than I would do, and given that we build on so much of what we have learned from others we'll never really get a full list. But I think it's worth a bit of thought, and being clear about how we do it.

https://www.w3.org/2024/09/25-vision-minutes.html#r03

RESOLUTION: Close 64 with an editorial change to include "and the Vision Task Force"

I think it may read better and be less likely to ruffle feathers if "notably" were changed to "including", but I leave that idea as purely editorial for the editor to consider

Closing with editorial change (#175) merged to include "and the Vision Task Force" per Vision Task Force resolution: https://www.w3.org/2024/09/25-vision-minutes.html#r03

(Originally published at: https://tantek.com/2024/269/t7/)