I've performed an independent review of https://www.w3.org/TR/2024/NOTE-w3c-vision-20241018/ , which is excellent. Thank you to those that put in the time to create the document. It captures what I've seen W3C doing for many years now and places those observations into a coherent narrative.

The only bit that was a bit jarring to read was that we keep referring to people as "users". Users have a number of connotations, but the most concerning one is that they are spectators... they just "consume" and that is not aligned with the Vision of the Web. It's a tool for human collaboration, which means producing AND consuming content.

We must also tread lightly, because there are other types of "users" of the Web... corporations (but really, these are just groups of people in a formal operating structure), traditional software (but again, usually operating on behalf of one or more individuals), and most recently AI that approaches and will quite possibly surpass human intelligence. Are we building the Web for an AI agent with super human intelligence? Are their needs more important than human needs? Are they just like software, ultimately acting on behalf of people.

IOW, "user" is the wrong word to use throughout the document; it evokes ambivalence and/or consumerism. If our priority of constituencies places people first, we need to humanize the language more.

Some alternate (and imperfect) choices include:

• people
• individuals
• participants
• contributors (where attention on a web page/app is a form of contribution)