meaning
Here is a quote from a menu:
Our eclairs always come in a wide range of different flavors. We keep
our most popular available all year round while others rotate and
change seasonally.
I'm concerned that the others can be misinterpreted as "in other restaurants" in this case. How can I avoid this possible ambiguity? Is it enough to use the others or is it always about the items mentioned before?
The New Oxford American has this:
rest one's case conclude one's presentation of evidence and arguments in a lawsuit.
• humorous said to show that one believes one has presented sufficient evidence for one's views.
It predates Perry Mason by a bit. My New Shorter Oxford English dates the following definition of rest from the mid-1800s:
rest v.
c. Voluntarily conclude presenting evidence in a law case. US.
But I found use of rest [one's] case as early as 1744 (check) from a British trial published in The Gentleman's Magazine Vol. XIV:
For the rest of us in the context of the above web pages you have linked to indicates that the author has found other resources that explain what they are explaining, but thinks that they are too technical and so are difficult to understand.
You could replace for the rest of us with the idioms
This would indicate that the content of the articles was aimed at people who do not (at the moment) have a deep understanding of the subject at hand, and so won't be familiar with the technical jargon associated with it. The article may in fact introduce some of the more technical terms and thus be a gateway for the reader to less accessible, but perhaps more informative, articles.
Best Answer
The obvious way to avoid ambiguity (as to whether the other eclairs are also ours, or are made by the competition) is simply to repeat the subject of the verb1...
(That's also my added comma before while.)
1 Strictly speaking, the "subject" of the verb rotate in OP's original verb is others = other eclairs - but in context, ignoring the contrived ambiguity over who did the rotating (if it's not a "reflexive" act ascribed to the eclairs themselves), it would normally be fair to say that...
...are equivalent in meaning (and are all idiomatic), regardless of the strict syntactic "verb subject".