Not just that; in general. If we don't share and record this kind of information, it literally dies out.
I'm talking about any kind of information as it applies to the use of this paper, but also how it's made. For instance, at some point, nobody will remember that Fuji used to coat materials in a slightly different way than Kodak does. Or why Fuji's paper is blue before you toss it into developer. Or why there's some mottling in certain prints. That a wide range of papers in fact used the exact same set of dyes and only a handful of emulsions. The list is endless. They're the kind of things that we currently don't even realize someone in the future is going to be puzzled over.
You might have noticed that one of the things I also do is carbon transfer and other alt. process prints. You'd be surprised how little we know about e.g. carbon transfer tissue that used to be commercially available a century ago. Nobody ever bothered to document manufacturing processes or recipes, for the most part. Today, carbon printers would certainly be interested (even if only academically) how these materials used to be made back then. The same for a host of other processes. Or perhaps an even better example: the autochrome process. Sure, some people have managed to recreate it, sort of - but most of that has been experimental work relying on very scant notes that left out just about every relevant detail.
I think they're realistic enough to realize that I'm just one guy who at best manages to talk to some other people. If not, I'll be sure to emphasize it. But for them, that might already be worthwhile.
Furthermore, if there's a valid reason and an efficient way to organize it, perhaps they're also willing to engage more directly with some of us. That's the kind of thing I'd like to explore with them - perhaps even more so than the technical questions.
That's one question we're virtually guaranteed to never get an answer to