Re: PAC: MT 10 (voting by mail)

[Eduardo Gutentag <eduardo.gutentag@eng.sun.com>]

Terry Allen wrote:
> 
> Jon wrote:
> | | This is in relation to holidays and weekends.  How about "seven
> | | calendar days"?
> |
> | That still doesn't solve the general problem.
> |
> | There is a reason that we have the concept of "business day" in
> | English, and so far nothing beyond the three alternatives I've
> | already suggested captures that.
> 
> What do you see as the general problem?
> 
> I think the reason we have the concept of business day is that you
> get to take weekends off.  If we say "seven calendar days" we cover
> five business days no matter what the weekend is, less holidays.

I don't see how you arrive at the above conclusion. Posit a
country where there are religious holidays that last seven
days, then there is no way that seven calendar days will cover
five business days. Also the idea of five being the magic number
is not universal, witness Israel. I think the ideal of reaching
a universal solution in this context is misguided. I firmly
support "seven calendar days".
 
> And it's rare that there are more than 2 holidays in any
> 7-day stretch, so we get pretty good assurance thant TC
> members will have 3 days to take note of a motion, consider, and
> vote.  Why is this inapropos?
> 
> regards, Terry

-- 
Eduardo Gutentag               |         e-mail: eduardo@eng.Sun.COM
XML Technology Center          |         Phone:  (650) 786-5498
Sun Microsystems Inc.          |         fax:    (650) 786-5727