On 27/11/2004 06:29, John Cowan wrote:
But what happens when a proposal put forward by the UTC is rejected by voting members of WG2, which are ISO member bodies worldwide? For example, I note from http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2876.pdf that the latest proposed amendments to 10646 have been approved by only 6 of 31 voting members and disapproved by 5, with 7 abstentions and 13 votes not received after the deadline. Now it may be that the issues which caused the votes against will be resolved; and I don't know what the voting rules are, whether the 6 votes are enough for approval as they are more than the 5. But this certainly shows that it is by no means certain that ISO member bodies will approve amendments proposed by the UTC....
But formally these other bodies do have the right to outvote Unicode, and in effect to force Unicode to reverse its decisions - or else to reverse its policy of maintaining compatibility.
Formally, yes. However, by acts of self-abnegation, WG2 has a fixed policy of not overriding the UTC or vice versa.
So what does WG2 do? Does it follow its fixed policy of agreeing with the UTC despite negative votes? Does "self-abnegation" trump democracy? Or is the UTC put in the position that it is forced to retract or amend its proposals?
Presumably also UTC members could decide to reverse their policy on this one as well. And with new voting members joining a rather small group, you never know what might happen.
-- Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) http://www.qaya.org/
