At 08:46 24-03-2013, John Curran wrote:
It is non-sensical to expect document editors to track and list everybody
who had input on a given draft, particularly when one considers the volume
of comments received on many of the mailing lists and working groups.
I would expect a document editor to track changes and be able to
explain why the changes were made. My guess is that a significant
number of working group drafts do not receive a high volume of comments.
At 10:42 24-03-2013, David Morris wrote:
credit. I think the act of following the mailing list discussion w/o
comment makes the contribution one of active review. So taking the time
to offer comment rises to a level above that. Since working groups don't
have membership, acknowledging all members of a WG is meaningless.
Yes.
There have been several recent long threads regarding how to encourage
continued participation in the IETF. Acknowledgement of WG participation
by 'name' is a small token to encourage future contributions, and I
suspect for some employer funded participants, important in the
justification of that funding.
Yes.
The tradition of acknowledgments may be slowly fading away for obvious reasons.
Regards,
-sm