CIP-1694 | Move Acknowledgements into optional section

[rphair]

We had a request on Discord (@klntsky) which was well received: to move "workshop participants" (and maybe sometimes lists of minor co-authors) to the ends of CIP documents as per the optional sections legitimised in #730.

This is also mandated by SEO principles like "source ordering" which is still an issue for properly indexing big documents with lots of names or code at the beginning.

Also CIP-0001 / CIP-9999 are updated to clear the way for similar Acknowledgements sections to be added in future CIPs / CPSs. CIP-1694 is the one with the widest audience so let's clear this one first & then I/we can submit one more PR to update all others to follow suit: after confirming this first change is well received by the community.

@Ryun1 @Crypto2099 you've been managing some CIP relevant workshops so maybe we can also assemble a list of other documents to update in this PR discussion thread. Another clue would be greping for the <details> tag to create the "accordion" sections.

@Hornan7 note this also updates the French version, but the commit hash is the same since the material isn't being re-translated. edit, p.s. French version has been removed from this PR since the English copy is changing a bit.

p.s. since this has long been associated with the Ledger Team perhaps @lehins @WhatisRT you would also confirm this particular change to CIP-1694 itself.

p.p.s. the "shortest common substring" algorithm used by diff doesn't always produce a straightforward result for moving one single large block of text elsewhere in a file. The only change submitted in 73c0391 is to move the entire #### Acknowledgements section from near the beginning (before the Motivation) to near the end (before the Copyright).

---

(updated CIP-1694 in English)
(updated CIP-0001)
(updated CIP-9999)

[rphair]

@lehins @WhatisRT @JaredCorduan - Editors in the CIP meeting today considered how important (politically and personally) it is for the community to be aware of these contributors, even in cases where nontechnical or hurried readers won't see the whole document.

We decided in these cases CIPs / CPSs can include a link to a latter Acknowledgements section "above the fold" by author's preference. I believe this can be done in the Abstract because community contribution can be considered part of a document's summary.

Please have a look at this suggestion and let us know if you think it's acceptable or if you would recommend different markup:

p.s. @Hornan7 if we do change the English markup I'll drop the French translation from this PR so you can provide the translation separately as usual.

[WhatisRT]

Looks good, especially with the added reference to the Acknowledgements section.

[Hornan7]

I'll make sure the French version is updated within 3 days of the merge.

[rphair]

@Ryun1 @Crypto2099 adding Last Check for next meeting since this has author & community approval & I believe just needs to be double checked by the editors.

[Ryun1]

I agree that this is a very sensible change, thanks for pushing forward with this @rphair 💪

[Crypto2099]

These changes make sense and will make the CIPs much more machine-readable (i.e. search engine optimization) while formalizing co-author and contributor acknowledgements as part of the CIP/CPS process.

[rphair]

epilogue: pinging other devs on Discord (in this post) to see which other proposals we might want to do this with (cc @Ryun1 @Crypto2099 @klntsky).