TAG/MeetCandidates2023/Martin Thomson
Martin Thomson - TAG Candidate 2023
These are Martin's answers to the 2023 TAG Candidate Questions.
You can also read Martin Thomson's nomination statement here.
Quotes from the minutes are not verbatim, and may not accurately reflect the candidate's statements.
What's an interesting question about how the Web’s architecture should evolve that you've come across recently?
"An interesting question" implies one, but there are lots of questions that are relevant:
- We know that technical measures are not sufficient to ensure that we get the Web we want when it comes to things like privacy. Is that a fundamental flaw in the architecture that we need to accept? And what is the appropriate shape of a reaction to any conclusion to that question? - What tools are available for ensuring that the Web is properly governed when technical governance through standards might be inadequate? - How do we balance the needs of those entities lower down in the priority of constituencies, when making allowances for their needs might be possible, but only by making a decision on behalf of many users that would adversely affect them, albeit trivially? What if their loss is huge, but temporary (cross-site cookies)? - What does it mean to have major disagreements between implementations of the platform, where certain features are either regarded as essential or too dangerous to ship? What are the consequences for this question when the market dominance (or monopoly power) of one party is aligned behind one or other position? - What role does/can Web governance have in relation to systems that -- while they might have originated on the Web -- they have since transcended its bounds? - Building sites is a serious business. What role can Web architecture play in making the development of Web content easier or harder? - IP address privacy for website interactions is a huge privacy issue, but the best technical solutions we have cost serious cash. Is it really possible to build a Web platform implementation today that meets modern expectations without also having deep pockets? - What is the role of the Web Platform when it comes to identity systems? In particular, what should the posture of the Web be toward the use of real-world identity? How do we manage the risks to the existing system -- especially the parts of it that we especially value -- when services start to depend on the use of identity?
Gee, it's so easy to ask questions if you don't feel any obligation to answer them...
What are the technical trends you notice are happening on the Web, and what implications do you see for the work of the W3C?
Being semi-facetious: AI. W3C cannot avoid getting caught up in the mad scrambling in this area. If it does, then that would be a good indication that the work we do is irrelevant, and I think that unlikely. I'll refrain from expressing an opinion on what to do concretely though. That's something that will require more thought and collaboration.
What should the TAG's role be in reviewing WG charters?
I'd like to see the TAG take a more active role in chartering. The current process is not functioning particularly well. I'd like to see the TAG take responsibility for reviewing and proposing charters to the AC, rather than have this be a team function. The TAG is more directly accountable to the membership and should be better equipped to make decisions about what work contributes best to the evolution of the architecture. Charters that are placed before the AC often land cold, which has lead to a series of failures and delays.
What do you think about adding maps to the Web Platform?
I haven't formed a strong opinion here, but there are a number of factors to consider here. The way that the Web enables the creation of services -- like Open Street Map or Google Maps or Bing Maps or Apple Maps -- is something worth preserving. The question about whether a particular service, which has widely demonstrated utility, is brought in to the platform needs to consider whether there is more value in having a diversity of implementations or not. Moving something into the platform can act to eliminate or reduce the value that exists in existing implementations. See the history of JQuery for an example of how the platform learned from success and ultimately eliminated the need for the library. Mapping services are probably too complicated, expensive, and too heavily tied into commercial interests for this to work. Also, I'm not sure that it is worth trying, especially when that would greatly increase the cost of building an implementation of the platform.
How do you think the appointed TAG seats should be used?
To address serious gaps in expertise. One consequence of holding elections is that the results reflect individual skills, but a slate will only have a balance of expertise by chance. Filling those gaps is what appointed seats are for, but it should not be done without a serious shortfall. Appointed seats do not answer as directly to the membership as those who are elected. For that reason, I would also caution against using appointment to return someone who has served multiple terms (in any capacity).
Has the TAG been taking the wrong approach in any of its recent activities, and if so, what would you change?
Without having served and without better information, I am reluctant to point accusatory fingers at my potential colleagues just yet. Nice try, though.
What can the TAG and W3C do about the environmental and social impacts of the Web?
Either very little or a great amount. There are some trends where the TAG has no real recognized authority or influence. Take the efforts to improve fuel efficiency in cars, which you might equate to efforts to improve Web performance. There, those improvements have also been used to enable more powerful or larger vehicles. By the same token, faster browsers and networks have enable the development of more bloated websites. And of course, that means that many services simply do not work for people who don't have access to the same performance, for reasons of geography, resources, or any other source of inequity.
That is not uniformly the case though. The TAG has some influence over participants in the W3C process and to the extent that they can offer a vision for a better outcome, there are opportunities. The question of TAG interactions with regulators also came up, which is a great opportunity to amplify the reach of the TAG. (See other answers for cautions about those engagements, as a caveat.)
How do you see the TAG filling a gap in technical leadership?
From the minutes...
I think this is the THE question. There are others which skirt around the edges. The role of the TAG is tech leadership light. The TAG has some ability to influence how technical work evolves, but it's not the same control as in other orgs. Taking the lead is one role, e.g. in privacy. There are more structural things like chartering. Review at the point of transition to REC is one thing I see involvement from TAG. Speaking from someone who sees early reviews, the volume is such that I don't think anyone gets good treatment. I think the TAG needs to be more judicial in picking up work. Discretionary vs. blanket. I haven't got the experience so if elected, I'd have to spend time learning the landscape before making firmer conclusions.
What is the most important problem the Web Platform faces that the TAG could reasonably address?
It is possible that there is one that is most important, but I can't reduce the list to one. And importance does not always translate directly into an action plan, where impact relative to effort might be a better way to sort.
Most of the things on my list above could be helped by work the TAG does.
What values will you bring to the TAG that other candidates might disagree with?
From the minutes...
I was in a session organized at TPAC, where this question [about Web Bluetooth] came up. It turned out quite heated when an objection was raised. I thought it was interesting in this context. These disagreements are healthy in that we can have them. We can be civil, but at TPAC this was not the case. It causesd people in this community some angst. Needs some work. The good thing about the relationship w/ Dan and Jeffrey is we don't agree, but can talk effectively. The TAG has a very big role in providing level-headedness and leadership.
What do you see as the role of the TAG in relation to regulators?
From the minutes...
A lot of things to talk about. Alot of things are setting policy. TAG is more technical than regulatory, they have technical competency on topics. Engaging w/ regulators w/ tech knowledge on TAG is constructive and useful. Dan mentioned technical competency is important. One thing with Internet Architecture Board, there's a tendency to stray from core competencies that can be less effective. One thing that was impactful was IAB to stick close to what their actual and perceived competencies are. Their messages are rooted there. that's effective. Goals we want to achieve in the web is complemented by work of regulators. Sometimes uncomfortably and that's ok. But sometimes we can together to make a better web.
What are examples of W3C work that's not really in scope, and of work elsewhere that could be in W3C's scope?
Answer here.
What specific things did you accomplish in your previous TAG term, or plan to accomplish in your first TAG term?
Answer here.
What is your experience/expertise on browser-based front-end and server-backed or back-end standards?
My experience is primarily in security, privacy, and networking. I've spent 10 years on browsers in those areas, working on diverse efforts. I've only ever built toy front-end projects, but I have some familiarity with the use of Web technologies for publishing. I maintain one of the more popular tools for managing -- and publishing -- IETF contributions, which includes, amongst other things, restyling of internet drafts (I developed the CSS for pages like this one as well as this one), and a tool for browsing GitHub issues offline. However, most of my experience is in back-end systems and architecture. My first serious job was as a developer for a telecommunications equipment vendor, building operational and signaling systems for mobile networks, but I spent a lot of that time in product management. At Microsoft, in addition to working on WebRTC standardization, I primarily worked on server infrastructure development.
For the last ten years, I've worked primarily on standards in the area of networking, privacy, and security: WebRTC, TLS, HTTP, QUIC. In this taxonomy, that is closer to the back-end.
What organizational or technical skills will you bring to the TAG?
From the minutes...
I worked on a similar body IAB. Experience on design review. I think one area identified as a soft spot is networking, that's my primary interest. I've learned a lot about browsers at Mozilla, but my primary background is networking and security. I can also explain GPS, working for an equipment vendor for mobile networks.
- jyasskin notes that Martin's reviews are excellent.