Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
[offline]
Len Bullard writes:
> Rick Jelliffe wrote:
>
> > This seems to be turning into "why T.B-L is bad for the WWW"
> > which is completely against the point I was trying to put forward:
> > personally, I think the idea of someone (or body) at the top whose
> > primary job is to unblock logjams is good (indeed, my countries
> > political constitution is based on this, very successfully).
>
> The idea in ours is that in a deadlock vote, one man or woman,
> can break a tie. Otherwise, the executive branch can propose
> and lobby for legislation and acts as top cop. It cannot
> thwart majority rule.
I don't know a lot about the U.S. constitution, but as I understood
it, it takes a two-thirds majority to override a presidential veto,
not 50% + 1.
The problem in the W3C is that even a 100% majority cannot override a
directorial veto; the benefit is that it's relatively easy for the
members to vote with their feet.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson david@m...
http://www.megginson.com/
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
