#1181: WG New Spec: Web Sustainability Guidelines

Visit on Github

Opened Dec 17, 2025

Specification

https://www.w3.org/TR/web-sustainability-guidelines/

Explainer

https://github.com/w3c/sustainableweb-wsg/blob/main/explainer.md

Links

  • The WG's request for this TAG review: Got group consensus in meeting of 11 December 2025 (minutes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mDp2Ao_FaurV4GCVkoYFz2NtgYhmeRAjYLKvqMAIEbk/edit?tab=t.0) <!-- If the WG didn't express consensus to ask the TAG for a review, use the "Other Specification Review" template instead, at https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/new?template=015-other-spec-review.yaml. This is usually a deep link into minutes or an email thread. -->
  • Previous early design review, if any: n/a
  • An introduction to the feature, aimed at unfamiliar audiences: https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/glance.html <!-- Can be the specification's or explainer's introduction, or another section. -->
  • A description of the problems that end-users were facing before this proposal: https://www.w3.org/TR/web-sustainability-guidelines/#background-on-wsg <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#end-user-need -->
  • Alternatives considered: n/a <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#alternatives -->
  • Examples of how to use the proposal to solve the end-users' problems: https:// <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#describe-proposal -->
  • What do the end-users experience with this proposal: n/a <!-- See https://w3ctag.github.io/explainer-explainer/#describe-proposal -->
  • User research you did to validate the problem and/or design, if any: no specific user research, but globally, there is a wide range of laws and policies around digital sustainability. We list them here: https://w3c.github.io/sustainableweb-wsg/policies.html
  • Web Platform Tests: there are no Web Platform Tests, we do consider testability in our section on measurability. <!-- Or other tests if this is not a web platform feature. -->

The specification

  • Follows the Web Platform Design Principles. <br>Not applicable, because not a web platform feature.
  • Includes Security and Privacy Considerations sections based on answers to the Security/Privacy Questionnaire. <br>We have the relevant sections and list related criteria in them, but the sections are not specifically based on the questionnaire.

Where and by whom is the work is being done?

  • GitHub repo: https://github.com/w3c/sustainableweb-wsg/
  • Primary contacts:
    • Alexander Dawson (@AlexDawsonUK), Invited Expert, lead editor
    • Rose Newell (@codewordcreative), Invited Expert, editor
    • Ines Akrap (@ines-akrap), Invited Expert, co-chair
    • Tim Frick (@timfrick), Invited Expert, co-chair
    • Mike Gifford (@mgifford), Invited Expert, co-chair
    • Tzviya Siegman (@TzviyaSiegman), W3C, staff contact
  • Organization/project driving the specification: n/a
  • This work is being funded by: n/a
  • Primary standards group developing this feature: Web Sustainability Interest Group
  • Incubation and standards groups that have discussed the design:

Feedback so far

  • Active horizontal reviews:
  • Multi-stakeholder feedback:
    • Chromium comments: n/a (not a browser feature)
    • Mozilla comments: n/a (not a browser feature) <!-- And/or other places they've given feedback -->
    • WebKit comments: n/a (not a browser feature) <!-- And/or other places they've given feedback -->
    • Informally we have had feedback from Green Software Foundation, Green Web Foundation, B Labs, ARCEP (Autorité de Régulation des Communications Électroniques, des Postes et de la Distribution de la Presse).
  • Major unresolved issues with or opposition to this specification: none at the moment
  • Status/issue trackers for implementations: n/a (not a browser feature) <!-- Include links to [Chrome Status](https://chromestatus.com/), [Mozilla's](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/), [WebKit's Bugzilla](https://bugs.webkit.org/), and trackers for other implementations if those are known to you. -->

You should also know that...

We are looking for feedback by February, we aim to publish in April.

Other comments that may be relevant:

<!-- Content below this is maintained by @w3c-tag-bot -->

Track conversations at https://tag-github-bot.w3.org/gh/w3ctag/design-reviews/1181

Discussions

Log in to see TAG-private discussions.

Discussed Jan 12, 2026 (See Github)

Jeffrey: I put together an initial draft for the beginning of the document in a Google Doc, which is easier to collaborate on (https://docs.google.com/document/d/19K0CXPUvPaeM7OxaciOZl2gNoAQTK16SMWcUY6VZc7M/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.ud7dyes4v2k). A lot to comment on.

… Overall, it could use some editing, they should have a look at a tech styleguide. Don’t have a definition of sustainability in this document, and they should have one.

…A lot of details: The talk about the guidelines and regulatory compliance, seems kind of backwards. Suggest to drop that they do this because of regulations.

…They talk about measurability, point at the WSG organization. They don’t justify how much impact things have. Suggested that they double-check that. They have a spreadsheet where they rated things along three axes (datacenter, network, device). Not every guideline breaks down well to those axes. For each of the guidelines, there’s a bunch of questions. Some seem redundant and could probably be merged.

… It may be better for people to skim the comments offline, and then I’d like to post it to see what they come back with, before we continue with the next sections.

Lola: Anything in particular you want things to double-check or comment on?

Jeffrey: Not really.

Lola: Should we say, "we've reviewed the first two sections" and then go on? Or do it internally, and give them a whole document?

Jeffrey: Normally, I would like to do the whole thing at once. As I found so many comments, I would like to do it step by step.

Lola: Wonder if we could split up that work. It might be good to have two or three more people on this, with every person reviewing a section. Suspect they want us to review everything. I don’t mind being assigned as well.

Jeffrey: Would love more people to review. Didn’t stop because it was so big, but the quantity of comments. May not be worth reviewing something that would have to change significantly.

Ehsan: I could also help.

Lola: Let’s give them your comments, and maybe it’s worth having a discussion with them. It may tie in with the societal impact questionnaire. Maybe there’s even an opportunity to collaborate here.

… We will have a look at your comments, post it, and figure out the rest later.