Summary

  • W3C lists five TAG seats for its 2026 cycle: nominations run through 10 November, the scheduled voting window is 17 November to 15 December, and results are expected on 18 December. The page listed two nominees when checked on 29 October; the final slate will determine whether a contested ballot is needed.
  • The election guide says vote results are visible only to the Team and tells operators not to report votes per candidate. January minutes record a decision to make results more transparent. The 25 October Process draft still supplies no tally rule.

Five seats, one unresolved ballot

W3C has put a date on the next election to its Technical Architecture Group. Five seats are to be filled: four for two-year terms and one for a year. Nominations opened on 13 October and close on 10 November. The public page schedules voting from 17 November through 15 December and expects results on 18 December.

The Process sets the minimum and maximum number of TAG nominees at the number of available seats. With five seats, five nominees are elected without a contested ballot; fewer triggers renewed nominations, and more triggers a vote. The page listed two nominees on 29 October, twelve days before nominations closed. The final count, not the calendar, decides whether members cast ballots.

That distinction matters because a winner list can describe two different events: a competitive count or a slate that fits the seats. W3C’s own 2025 TAG announcement said four nominees matched four available seats and were thereby elected. Readers could tell that no contest had been needed because the announcement said so. A useful record should keep that fact visible every year, then show the count when a count exists.

The TAG stewards Web architecture, resolves architecture questions and coordinates work across technologies. Its members also take part in W3C Council decisions on Submission Appeals and Formal Objections. The member organizations that elect these stewards have a real governance role; the rest of the Web sees the resulting standards and decisions without a ballot of its own.

The Team sees the numbers; the public sees the names

W3C’s current election guide draws a sharp line around vote data. It says results are visible only to the Team and archived. The announcement checklist tells the Advisory Committee to name the winners, tied candidates and those receiving shorter terms, and expressly says not to report the number of votes for each candidate. A public result can therefore identify who takes office while withholding how much support each person received and how many members took part.

The secrecy of each ballot and publication of aggregate totals are separate decisions. The Process says Advisory Committee members cast ranked ballots under a Single Transferable Vote system. Individual preferences can remain confidential while the institution publishes aggregate turnout and candidate counts. The Team selects the specific tabulation method for each election and must stabilize it by the call for votes; readers need that method, the count and the seat-assignment rule to understand what “elected” means.

A transparency decision still needs a sentence in the rulebook

The question has sat in W3C’s own issue tracker since January 2023. Issue 698 asks for the number of votes cast overall and for each candidate, arguing that the figures would let members assess engagement and whether the AC’s voting method works. As of 29 October 2026, it remained open with the label “Needs proposed PR” and no linked pull request.

On 28 January 2026, minutes from the W3C Process Community Group record Brent saying that the Advisory Board had resolved to be transparent about election results and that TAG would follow. The same discussion says voter anonymity is distinct from candidate identity, calls for no information to be released before voting closes, and anticipates a Process-document change. The minutes are manually created; the current public Process draft still lacks adopted wording that defines the promised disclosure.

The 25 October 2026 Process draft is a work in progress, and W3C says its groups continue to follow the latest operative Process. Its election section does not add an aggregate-results requirement. The older public election guide still says to keep candidate counts out of the announcement. A direction expressed in a meeting has not yet become a procedure the next election can follow.

Publish the tally without publishing the voter

Before the scheduled voting window, W3C should state what a public result contains. At minimum, that means whether a real ballot occurred, how many ballots were valid, the number of members who participated, the version of the STV tabulation method, candidate totals by count round, and any tie-breaking calculation. Voter-level ballots and identities stay out of the public record.

The timetable gives W3C a clean point to settle the issue: close nominations on 10 November, confirm whether a ballot is required, then publish the exact count format before voting begins. On 18 December, the result can carry the same fields beside the winners. If there is no contest, say that the nominees filled the seats under the rule. If there is a contest, publish the aggregate count and preserve it alongside the method.

The tally would measure the Advisory Committee electorate: member organizations voting through their representatives. The wider Web has no ballot in this process. That narrower figure is the one the record can support. A process that publishes candidates, seats, method and outcome but withholds participation data asks outsiders to trust a result they cannot inspect. Until the announcement rule changes, the public sees who takes a seat without seeing how many members helped choose them.

Sources