I don't agree that editors should miss efforts and input owners for their individual-draft or WG draft. I think it is a shame that editors may ignore such efforts while they benefit from the input to change their draft. Why editor name is mentioned as authors not contributors while it may be the IETF draft, IMHO because they are the main contributors, but acknowledgements are not only for other input contributors, also SHOULD include commenters who reply to requests and add to the document value/direction. Once I heard one IETF WG Chair (security issues wg) explaining the *note well* as if any participant makes a side conversation ideas and was heard by others, then it can be stolen. It is a shame to allow stealing information without relating to sources or resources, I think not acknowledging reviewers is not professional and wrong tradition. AB On 3/24/13, SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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 > >