Tantek Çelik

inventor, connector, writer, runner, scientist, more.

💬 👏
  1. W3C TPAC 2022 Sustainability Community Group Meeting

    This year’s W3C TPAC Plenary Day was a combination of the first ever AC open session in the early morning, and breakout sessions in the late morning and afternoon. Nick Doty proposed a breakout session for Sustainability for the Web and W3C which he & I volunteered to co-chair, as co-chairs of the Sustainability (s12y) CG which we created on Earth Day earlier this year. Nick & I met during a break on Wednesday afternoon and made plans for how we would run the session as a Sustainability CG meeting, which topics to introduce, how to deal with unproductive participation if any, and how to focus the latter part of the session into follow-up actions.

    We agreed that our primary role as chairs should be facilitation. We determined a few key meeting goals, in particular to help participants:

    • Avoid/minimize any trolling or fallacy arguments (based on experience from 2021)
    • Learn who is interested in which sustainability topics & work areas
    • Determine clusters of similar, related, and overlapping sustainability topics
    • Focus on prioritizing actual sustainability work rather than process mechanics
    • Encourage active collaboration in work areas (like a do-ocracy)

    The session went better than I expected. The small meeting room was packed with ~20 participants, with a few more joining us on Zoom (which thankfully worked without any issues, thanks to the W3C staff for setting that up so all we had to do as chairs was push a button to start the meeting!).

    I am grateful for everyone’s participation and more importantly the shared sense of collaboration, teamwork, and frank urgency. It was great to meet & connect in-person, and see everyone on video who took time out of their days across timezones to join us. There was a lot of eagerness in participation, and Nick & I did our best to give everyone who wanted to speak time to contribute (the IRC bot Zakim's two minute speaker timer feature helped).

    It was one of the more hopeful meetings I participated in all week. Thanks to Yoav Weiss for scribing the minutes. Here are a few of the highlights.

    Session Introduction

    Nick introduced himself and proposed topics of discussion for our breakout session.

    • How we can apply sustainbility to web standards
    • Goals we could work on as a community
    • Consider metrics to enable other measures to take effect
    • Measure the impact of the W3C meetings themselves
    • Working mode and how we talk about sustainability in W3C
    • Horizontal reviews

    I introduced myself and my role at Mozilla as one our Environmental Champions, and noted that it’s been three years since we had the chance to meet in person at TPAC. Since then many of us who participate at W3C have recognized the urgency of sustainability, especially as underscored by recent IPCC reports. From the past few years of publications & discussions:

    For our TPAC 2022 session, I asked that we proceed with the assumption of sustainability as a principle, and that if folks came to argue with that, that they should raise an issue with the TAG, not this meeting.

    In the Call for Participation in the Sustainability Community Group, we highlighted both developing a W3C practice of Sustainability (s12y) Horizontal Review (similar to a11y, i18n, privacy, security) as proposed at TPAC 2021, and an overall venue for participants to discuss all aspects of sustainability with respect to web technologies present & future. For our limited meeting time, I asked participants to share how they want to have the biggest impact on sustainability at W3C, with the web in general, and actively prioritize our work accordingly.

    Work Areas, Groups, Resources

    Everyone took turns introducing themselves and expressing which aspects of sustainability were important to them, noting any particular background or applicable expertise, as well as which other W3C groups they are participating in, as opportunities for liaison and collaboration. Several clusters of interest emerged:

    • Technologies to reduce energy usage
    • W3C meetings and operations
    • Measurement
    • System Effects
    • Horizontal Review
    • Principles

    The following W3C Groups were noted which are either already working on sustainability related efforts or would be good for collaboration, and except for the TAG, had a group co-chair in the meeting!

    I proposed adding a liaisons section to our public Sustainability wiki page accordingly explicitly listing these groups and specific items for collaboration. Participants also shared the following links to additional efforts & resources:

    Sustainability Work In Public By Default

    Noting that since all our work on sustainability is built on a lot of public work by others, the best chance of our work having an impact is to also do it publicly, I proposed that Sustainability CG work in public by default, as well as sustainability work at W3C in general, and that we send that request to the AB to advise W3C accordingly. The proposal was strongly supported with no opposition.

    Active Interest From Organizations

    There were a number of organizations whose representatives indicated that they are committed to making a positive impact on the environment, and would like to work on efforts accordingly in the Sustainability CG, or would at least see if they could contact experts at their organizations to see if any of them were interested in contributing.

    • Igalia
    • mesur.io
    • Mozilla
    • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
    • Washington Post

    Meeting Wrap-up And Next Steps

    We finished up the meeting with participants signing up to work on each of the work areas (clusters of interest noted above) that they were personally interested in working on. This has been captured on our wiki: W3C Wiki: Sustainability Work Areas.

    The weekend after the meeting I wrote up an email summary of the meeting & next steps and sent it directly to those who were present at the meeting, encouraging them to Join the Sustainability Community Group (requires a W3C account) for future emails and updates. Nick & I are also on the W3C Community Slack #sustainability channel which I recommended joining. Signup link: https://www.w3.org/slack-w3ccommunity-invite

    Next Steps: we encouraged everyone signed up for a Work Area to reach out to each other directly and determine their preferred work mode, including in which venue they’d like to do the work, whether in the Sustainability CG, another CG, or somewhere else. We noted that work on sustainable development & design of web sites in particular should be done directly with the Sustainable Web Design CG (sustyweb), “a community group dedicated to creating sustainable websites”.

    Some possibilities for work modes that Work Area participants can use:

    • W3C Community Slack #sustainability channel
    • public-sustainability email list of the Sustainability CG
    • Our Sustainability wiki page, creating "/" subpages as needed

    There is lots of work to do across many different areas for sustainability & the web, and for technology as a whole, which lends itself to small groups working in parallel. Nick & I want to help facilitate those that have the interest, energy, and initiative to do so. We are available to help Work Area participants pick a work mode & venue that will best meet their needs and help them get started on their projects.

  2. ↳ In reply to issue 242 of GitHub project “standards-positions” I like the direction of simplifying our positions labels, and some degree of harmonizing for better communication.

    Rephrased from what I shared in some private discussions earlier this week:

    I think "support" may inadvertently convey a stronger meaning than what we intend a lot of the time. Similarly "oppose".

    One thing that other browsers explicitly look for are "positive signals" or absence of "negative signals", so I think it may be better to directly use such terms, e.g.

    "positive", "neutral", "negative"


    In my opinion this also reads better for evaluations of proposals which in their current state have more disadvantages than advantages, we can mark them "negative" without completely discouraging someone with "oppose" which sounds more like something we’d actively fight.

    Similarly, a lot of the time we don’t want to say "Mozilla supports X" if we think something has promise but has lots of holes to fill in or other problems. Such an expression may have the unintended consequence of discouraging (or deprioritizing) active work on the issues we file for such holes/problems. Also "support" is an overloaded term, that I’d expect broader audiences to possibly misinterpret as indicative of product plans.

    I believe "positive, neutral, negative" will more accurately convey what we mean than current labels, with less chance of misinterpretation (whether intentional or not) than the alternatives.

  3. ↳ In reply to a comment on issue 563 of GitHub project “standards-positions” https://github.com/jfkthame I took a look and no particular concerns.

    I’ll label this `worth-prototyping` since it’s only in a Working Draft currently.

    Since https://github.com/emilio reviewed the code/tests, I’ll leave it up to him to review this too and close accordingly.

  4. ↳ In reply to issue 6 of GitHub project “AB-public” This is another “to-do list” issue that is open-ended and requires someone to go through a bunch of somewhat lengthy existing discussions elsewhere to try to extract specific proposals for improvement, similar in that regards to https://github.com/w3c/AB-public/issues/2 except that was primarily about extracting from a curated pre-existing crafted text, and this issue is more of an amalgam of a bunch of lists of things from several authors, some of which are already handled in the Vision.

    Similar to https://github.com/w3c/AB-public/issues/2:

    Proposed resolution:
    * defer this issue and leave it open to specific proposals (in new issues) for inclusion of any relevant specific points & content from the those old discussions. If there are no specific proposals by end of year 2022, close this issue without changes, noting that new issues for specific points may still be raised, yet due to lack of interest, no one is being assigned to attempt to extract specific points from other people’s lists made in GitHub comments. I.e. if folks feel strongly about specific points in their lists, it is their responsibility to file new specific issues for each point they feel strongly about.

  5. ↳ In reply to issue 5 of GitHub project “AB-public” Original issue both has some points and may be requesting more detail than is appropriate for a Vision document.

    Per the one response on the original issue, I’m not sure how to adequately address this issue either, except to perhaps consider linking to more detailed documents regarding “good of its users” and “safe for its users”, though I’m not certain enough about that approach to propose resolving in that manner. That is, this issue may merit some additional time and thoughtful consideration to come up with ways to address the points the original issue creator brought up.

    Proposed resolution:
    * keep this issue open to asynchronous discussion til the end of the year 2022. If it hasn’t made progress by then, consider linking the phrases “good of its users” and “safe for its users” to other related documents at W3C such as the TAG Ethical Web Principles https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/ethical-web-principles/

    Alternatively, if the AB deems that consideration (just linking those phrases to the TAG Ethical Web Principles) sufficient now, I would be ok with making edits to the Vision accordingly and closing the issue.

  6. ↳ In reply to issue 4 of GitHub project “AB-public” Original issue had one response pushing back on how this was attempted in crafting the Vision but essentially did not work in practice.

    Having worked on the Vision myself and seeing firsthand that combining principles related to the web and W3C in one document provides important context, and improves understanding & collective sense-making, I agree with the pushback.

    As there was no follow-up response (for nearly 3 months), and I don’t think this is worth pursuing:

    Proposed resolution:
    * close this issue without changes, as addressed by the response in the original issue and this follow-up comment.

  7. 👎 to issue 4 of GitHub project “AB-public”

  8. ↳ In reply to issue 3 of GitHub project “AB-public” This is an astute insight. The Vision’s Purpose section https://github.com/w3c/AB-public/tree/main/Vision#our-purpose-focusing-on-the-integrity-of-the-web can be improved in many ways to more explicitly document W3C’s existing practices which serve the public at large.

    Proposed resolutions:
    * Add “and public feedback” to the end of the first point “Provide an open forum…”
    * Change “Ensure that standards are developed” to “Ensure that standards are openly developed”, perhaps defining “openly developed” in the Glossary per https://github.com/w3c/AB-public/issues/1 which could note that “openly developed” means publicly viewable discussion notes, proposals, issues, drafts, test suites, implementation reports, decisions, and conflict resolutions.
    * Add “for the public at large” after “… address evolving use cases”

  9. 👍 to issue 3 of GitHub project “AB-public”

  10. ↳ In reply to issue 2 of GitHub project “AB-public” Archived link to said “7 points” document for context:
    * https://web.archive.org/web/20210507094551/http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Points/

    There was a side comment in prior discussion of this issue to also consider updating other pages about mission, principles, and vision, such as:
    * https://www.w3.org/Consortium/mission
    However, “updating [other] existing pages” is off-topic for this specific issue, which is about updating the Vision document in particular.

    Proposed resolutions:
    * defer this issue and leave it open to specific proposals (in new issues) for inclusion of any relevant content from the old “7 points” document. If there are no specific proposals from the suggested old “7 points” document by end of year 2022, close this issue without changes.
    * create a separate new issue for “Update w3.org/Consortium/mission to align with updated Vision”

  11. ↳ In reply to issue 1 of GitHub project “AB-public” Proposed resolution: accept & resolve this issue: there was no objection in prior discussion, and it will help make the Vision more understandable to a broader audience, while helping it stay succinct which helps keep the Vision more accessible to a broader audience.

    Proposed next steps to close this issue:
    * create a Glossary file as a peer to the Vision document
    * stub it (explicitly) with scope (the Vision document) and one or a few obvious jargon terms from the Vision (e.g. “phishing”) with anchors
    * link to Glossary from the footer of the Vision document
    * link from the first occurence of a jargon term in the Vision to the specific term in the Glossary
    * add a “How to contribute” footer to Glossary encouraging proposed additions to grow the Glossary as necessary to define additional jargon terms in the Vision with broadly accepted uses & definitions within the W3C community, perhaps encouraging singular pull requests for terms that may require in depth discussion such as “centralization” or are otherwise contentious in actual practical use in W3C discussions.

    Aside: in the interest of re-use, resources at https://www.w3.org/Glossary.html may be helpful, but let’s please avoid the trap of creating yet another “system” (to be unmaintained & abandoned) like https://www.w3.org/Terms

  12. 👍 to issue 1 of GitHub project “AB-public”

  13. 👍 to a comment on issue 56 of GitHub project “microformats2-parsing”

  14. Since ~2021* I’ve redirected /github to my GitHub profile to own my links to GH repos like https://tantek.com/github/cassis

    Apache htaccess code to #OwnYourLinks:

    RedirectTemp /github https://github.com/tantek

    change /tantek to your GitHub /username

    More on this technique: https://indieweb.org/ownyourlinks

    * https://tantek.com/2021/084/t1/ownyourlinks-indieweb-github-redirect

  15. Ran my 10th #BayToBreakers in 1:38:32 on Sunday, apparently 3 seconds faster than the most recent in 2019, again the day after an @SFRunCo Saturday trail #run, and a double-day Friday.

    #2022_135 #SanFrancisco #runner

    2019: https://tantek.com/2019/139/t1/ran-baytobreakers

  16. May the 4th be with you!

    (except for Alioto and other #SCOTUS justices with plans to overturn #RoeVsWade)


    #MayThe4th #MayThe4thBeWithYou #StarWars #StarWarsDay

  17. @IndieWebCamp Düsseldorf is a wrap!

    For Create Day, I added code to my publishing system to only syndicate (POSSE) a reply post to Twitter if it actually has an @-name, otherwise if it’s a peer-to-peer reply, just directly send them a Webmention.

  18. ↳ In reply to calumryan.com’s post IndieWebCamp Create Day participants looking eager to create!

    Inspirational quote on https://indieweb.org/creator to get us started:

     “When you don’t create things, you become defined by your tastes rather than your ability. Your tastes only narrow & exclude people. So create.” — Why The Lucky Stiff

  19. ↳ In reply to calumryan.com’s post Nice photo of day 1 IndieWebCamp participants!

  20. likes Calum's photo at and Calum's photo at

  21. RSVP yes to: an IndieWeb event co-organizing @IndieWebCamp Düsseldorf this weekend with @marcthiele @calum_ryan @jkphl!
    🗓 2022-04-30…05-01
    📍 @cgi_global
    🎟 https://btco.nf/iwcdus22
    ℹ️ https://indieweb.org/2022/DUS

    Also excited for the @btconf main event! https://twitter.com/btconf/status/1519910629561319424

  22. Happy Earth Day!

    Thanks to the W3C #sustainability Community, we’ve created a W3C Sustainability Community Group (CG)!


    Last fall at my #TPAC2021 Sustainability session I proposed that W3C needed to consider sustainability for horizontal review. We now have a community group for discussing exactly that.

    Copied from the W3C Community Slack:

    Note past/existing CGs which this proposed group is not intending to replace (thanks Nick Doty for digging through CGs)


    I’m proposing starting the CG with myself (with background as leading the Sustainability session at TPAC 2021) and Nick Doty (experienced co-chair of Privacy Interest Group) as co-chairs to start with, and certainly open to adding additional co-chairs (especially those with both topical experience/expertise and experience de-escalating conflicts and promptly resolving Code of Conduct (CEPC) violations)

  23. On this 4/04 day, pour one out for sites & permalinks lost this past year like:
    * Google App Maker (site not found)
    * Yahoo Groups (posts & permalinks gone, subdomain redirects)

    More 404 Not Found: https://indieweb.org/site-deaths#2021
    #404NotFound, day of the #deadweb

  24. Introducing #metaformats (https://microformats.org/wiki/metaformats), an extension to #microformats2 for parsing invisible data published in HTML meta tags, for backward compatibility with existing vocabularies consumed by multiple testable interoperable implementations.

  25. Dear #SanFrancisco friends who went to #SXSW or #Austin #Texas recently, please stay home, isolate for a week, and test on days 5-7. The #SXSWSARS was particularly bad this year.

    #COVID19 #superSpreader #wearAMask


    h/t @KevinMarks

  26. Published today, years of working with co-workers @Mozilla and something I'm proud of: https://webvision.mozilla.org/

    #OpenWeb #IndieWeb fans & #WebDevs see https://webvision.mozilla.org/full/ with #HTML #CSS #JS, nods to nascent #OpenUI & #sustainability #s12y efforts, and a lot more.

  27. ↳ In reply to @tomcoates’s tweet @tomcoates I’ve been vicariously enjoying the @SwarmApp checkins, though there’s nothing like Austin in-person. Even for a (relatively new) plant-eating person. Missing Torchy’s tacos 🔥 and Iron Cactus’s made-at-the-table guacamole 🥑

  28. likes @tomcoates’s tweet at and @shiflett’s tweet at

  29. ↳ In reply to @shiflett’s tweet @shiflett thank you Chris! Hope you’re doing well friend.

    Also I relate so strongly to this: https://twitter.com/shiflett/status/968899276129488897