Nominations and Statements for W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) 2025 Election Nominations and Statements for W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) 2025 ElectionForm for W3C Advisory Committee to nominate individuals is now closed (W3C Members only) | TAG home
This page publicly lists nominations and statements for the 2025 election to the Technical Architecture Group (TAG). Each person has been nominated by at least one W3C Member according to the TAG election process.
The W3C Membership elects the members of the TAG. For this election, W3C will fill four seats. W3C expects to announce the results on 23 December 2025.
Timeline:
Note: The deadline for nominations is 23:59 UTC, 11 November 2025.
The number of nominees being equal to the number of available seats, the nominees were thereby elected. The election results were announced on 18 November 2025.
During the nomination period, all nominations (e.g., who nominates whom) will be made available publicly on a rolling basis.
The following nominations have been made (listed in alphabetical order by family name):
An asterisk (*) indicates that the nominee is a current participant. All individuals were nominated by the AC Representatives of their organizations unless otherwise indicated below.
The following nomination statements have been made (listed in alphabetical order by family name):
Hello, I'm Matthew, and I'm running for re-election to the TAG. It is a tremendous privilege to have been co-entrusted with the technical stewardship of the platform on your behalf. It is also a privilege to be considered as a candidate in this election. I'd like to set out: how I think TAG is doing; how I am contributing; and how I would focus on if re-elected.
The platform's capabilities continue to evolve broadly, and quickly. This presents great opportunities to serve many people better, and some people for the first time. However, we must consider the widest possible set of use cases when making design decisions - not because it's the right thing to do, but because in a world-wide, multi-form-factor, inclusive, internationalised, privacy-preserving web, it's the only thing to do.
I'm optimistic for the future of the platform, but I am concerned that sometimes, we still face challenges in doing this. The good news is that, as a TAG member, and co-chair of the Accessible Platform Architectures (APA) WG, all the groups we've worked with have a strong commitment to accessibility - it's the default now that we'll see specs with well thought-out 'Accessibility Considerations' sections. But, people designing new features and APIs can easily, and understandably, be unaware that some of the trade-offs they're making in the design of those features will have a direct, and often profound, impact on accessibility. Some of the reasons for this are:
The fact that changes in one part of the platform can shift the technical assumptions on which other parts of the platform, or browser, and assistive technology stack, are based.
Understandable expertise that is focused on specific areas of the platform, leading to solutions that can be inconsistent, or duplicative, when looked at holistically.
Awareness of the hugely varied ways people consume and create content, and the needs they have (for examples of these, see the Accessible User Requirements docs from APA's Research Questions Task Force).
It is really hard to do successful user/developer research - both due to resourcing in general, and the fact that the above 'unknown unknowns' exist. A lot of good user research is being done, but it's very hard to do. Sometimes, key use cases can be missed.
Further, the platform provides many of the primitives with which we can experiment and build things that might become - with further engineering and refinement - part of the platform in future. That is definitely a feature, not a bug, but there are inevitable tensions that this malleability can create. Our community's pillars of consensus and mutual respect guide us all in striking these balances (as they are invariably not always binary decisions between low-level or high-level, fast or slow, and so on) in line with the priority of constituencies. But, due to the risks I mentioned above, this can lead to features that inadvertently exclude a wide range of people.
Clearly it's the TAG's job to help directly with some of these challenges, by providing oversight, and guidance though design reviews and principles (and I feel this process is going well, with a good balance between the two). But I do think that some systematic effort and changes are needed to more fully address the issues. I've aimed to contribute, in a number of ways:
Building on previous TAGs' work, I've helped to make the process of requesting accessibility review easier, by simplifying the intake process for the screener. APA WG also applied the same approach to its checklist.
Based on my experience contributing to TAG's review processes, making improvements to APA's horizontal review process, and planning to re-focus the work on the Framework for Accessibility in the Specification of Technologies (FAST) more concretely on the needs of web specs, and their authors (as outlined in the accessibility review breakout at TPAC 2025).
Contributing (along with Jeffrey, and former TAG members) to sessions on cross-cutting issues, such as the Fixing Element References breakout at TPAC 2025.
Contributing to design reviews, highlighting the opportunities or challenges for accessibility in relation to the proposal.
Should I be re-elected, what would I strive to contribute?
Being part of the conversation with feature designers whilst the design trade-offs are being made has helped me learn about the constraints involved - and to provide advice in a timely manner. I look forward to continuing to provide this input, and to distilling what we are learning into resources such as updated versions of the Framework for Accessibility in the Specification of Technologies (FAST) (similarly to how the Design Principles distil the patterns we find in design reviews).
Respond to feedback on the changes we've made so far, and continue to strengthen TAG's and APA's processes for fielding questions early on. Look for ways to harmonise these changes with the exciting proposals from the Team and others around incubation and adoption of specs into groups.
Regarding technical leadership... At the end of last year, TAG decided to focus more on producing documentation, including design principles, and Findings on key topics. Some of the challenges we face - particularly around privacy - are due to external political factors, of which we must remain aware and respectful. We can serve the global community by clearly, factually, describing the way that web technologies work, and the technical effects of their use. This provides value for decision makers, technical leadership for W3C, and ultimately helps people using the web.
Please do vote, in whichever way you feel meets the needs of the platform. Thank you for your consideration.
My Intel colleagues and I have worked alongside Christian since he started participating in W3C. We can attest to his unwavering commitment to the web community. As a TAG Associate, Christian has demonstrated his dedication to service, technical knowledge, and capability to contribute both deep and wide. Christian collaborates with both web implementers and web developers across industries and works with businesses that adopt AI into their web-based products. He brings real-world insights into the W3C community. He has demonstrably shaped the web foundations we now build for the AI era, together. Christian is an invaluable asset to the TAG. We strongly endorse his candidacy in this TAG election and thank you for your consideration.
Hi! My name is Christian Liebel. I’m a software engineer with Thinktecture, a consulting firm focused on web application development. Currently, I’m serving as one of the first-ever TAG Associates. Over the past year, I’ve supported the TAG in carrying out several critical design reviews in the areas of web apps, privacy, and CSS. Now, I’m running for a regular seat on the TAG.
As an experienced software architect and technical writer, recognized as Google Developer Expert and Microsoft Most Valuable Professional, I will contribute to the TAG’s ongoing work, including design reviews, findings, and evolving the API and privacy design principles. My company Thinktecture will provide the necessary time away from work, and travel budget.
Over the past decade, I've worked with numerous clients across a range of industries building innovative web applications that push the boundaries of the web platform to its limits. I’ve delivered hundreds of talks at international developer conferences about emerging web technologies, have been a leading member of the Web Applications Working Group, and have actively contributed to the Web Application Manifest specification. My goal is to ensure that developers’ needs are being addressed.
Generative AI has led to the most substantial shift in software architecture in years. I want to ensure that the web can seamlessly integrate with generative models, enabling developers to build applications that boost productivity and enhance user experience. Moreover, I’m dedicated to ensuring that the web remains the premier platform for application development by empowering developers with all necessary capabilities.
I actively collaborate with all major browser manufacturers, including sending patches to Chromium, Gecko, and WebKit, and I understand the user, author, vendor, and specification sides of the web. I want to offer my vendor-neutral perspective and promise proper execution based on the ethical principles and code of conduct of the W3C. I want to thank Intel for their nomination.
I’m pleased to nominate Jeffrey for the TAG on behalf of Mozilla.
Jeffrey was appointed to the TAG a short while after my own term started. He quickly demonstrated an aptitude for the work, both on a technical level and especially in terms of how to engage constructively.
On any given question, Jeffrey’s input is highly valued by other TAG members. He has a strong ability to listen to diverse input from stakeholders and clearly articulate different positions in a way that helps advance mutual understanding. That is a key skill for TAG members, but it wouldn’t be possible without Jeffrey’s broad understanding of the web platform.
Jeffrey has been serving as one of the TAG co-chairs now for some time. He has also been the primary driver of work on defining what a user agent is, in addition to ongoing work on design principles, privacy principles, and other TAG deliverables. Jeffrey has also contributed to tooling that has improved the efficiency of the TAG in their work on design reviews.
Jeffrey exemplifies the qualities that the TAG needs from its members, so I encourage other AC members to rank Jeffrey highly in their votes.
As the Technical Director at Alipay MiniApp in Ant Group, Sen Yu has spent the last decade exploring the efficient combination of mobile applications and Web technologies via various forms of applications. His technical background spans Mobile Hybrid Web, Web/Native Hybrid Rendering, Mobile Payment, and related fields. The foundational architecture of Alipay MiniApp that he leads has been integrated into domestic and international mobile ecosystems (such as Taobao and Amap), multiple banking institutions, and international wallets connected via Alipay+, serving hundreds of millions of users globally.
Sen Yu 's involvement in W3C community dates back to 2019. He has engaged in the incubation as well as design and development of Miniapps standards in the W3C MiniApps Working Group. His current work focuses on advancing the evolution of MiniApps with in W3C standards to as to make Miniapps a good platform to bridge the Web and mobile native applications. Beyond W3C activities , he participates in developing standards for SDK at the Software Green Alliance.
Sen Yu's extensive engineering background in mobile web applications as well as rich industry experience could be a useful supplement to the TAG. And he is very happy to join the global community and do his bits for the Web.