W3C's 'Moral Majesty'

[David Megginson]

[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 at megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
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 at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)