Maybe I just haven't been part of software development in a large enough company, but I don't think a vote of all-or-none is the best idea. This of course is just my opinion and it is based on ZERO proof. I feel like it should at least be majority rules.
My concern would be if Google would oppose something desperately needed by the community because the feature they are blocking for will benefit them in some way financially. I'm sure it's a hard case to make, but I am curious nonetheless.
Consider your hypothetical: a browser vendor doesn't want to implement some feature. Because of your proposed process change, the feature gets rammed through into the standard over that browser vendor's objections. They probably won't implement it (their objections remain, despite the political process). The standard is now a "standard", and we're right back to the browser wars again.
My concern would be if Google would oppose something desperately needed by the community because the feature they are blocking for will benefit them in some way financially. I'm sure it's a hard case to make, but I am curious nonetheless.