RE: [election-services] High-Level Process Model

[Borras John - e-Envoy e-Government -<johnborras@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk>]

In the project plan we have audit down to John Ross to lead on.  Suggest we
leave him to pull together a discussion document on this aspect as we
continue our debate on the processes and draft schemas.
John   

-----Original Message-----
From: TJ Rainsford [mailto:TRainsford@ifes.org]
Sent: 05 December 2001 16:22
To: Paul Spencer; Jason Kitcat; John Ross; Borras John - e-Envoy
e-Government -; election-services@lists.oasis-open.org;
john.w.stevens@bt.com; Robin Anthony work; Glidden, Julia; Macintosh,
Ann; caoun@election.com
Subject: RE: [election-services] High-Level Process Model


I tend to agree with Paul but I think that some of the issues he
mentions may get flushed out when we deal with the schemas from the vote
process itself.  I guess time will tell on this one.

TJ

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Spencer [mailto:paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:06 AM
To: Jason Kitcat; TJ Rainsford; John Ross; Borras John - e-Envoy
e-Government -; election-services@lists.oasis-open.org;
john.w.stevens@bt.com; paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk; Robin Anthony work;
Glidden, Julia; Macintosh, Ann; caoun@election.com
Subject: RE: [election-services] High-Level Process Model


There are definitely new data items that relate to audit. For example,
from
discussion with Riverside County CA, I believe we need information on
the
portal, kiosk etc through which the vote was placed. In each process, we
should explicitly consider audit requirements and make sure we involve
the
right experts. This is in addition to specific audit processes.

Regards

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Kitcat [mailto:jeep@free-project.org]
> Sent: 05 December 2001 10:03
> To: TJ Rainsford; John Ross; Borras John - e-Envoy e-Government -;
> election-services@lists.oasis-open.org; john.w.stevens@bt.com;
> paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk; Robin Anthony work; Glidden, Julia;
> Macintosh, Ann; caoun@election.com
> Subject: RE: [election-services] High-Level Process Model
>
>
> TJ,
>
> At 9:34 am -0500 4/12/01, TJ Rainsford wrote:
>
> >My only comment at the moment is the Audit section of the process.  I
> >wonder if there is not multiple audit points throughout the process
> >(i.e. Audit of voter rolls; audit during candidate certification
prior
> >to ballot production; audit of final tally).  Perhaps I am just
opening
> >yet another proverbial "can of worms" but I think the auditability of
> >the system is critical to it acceptance in a democratic election
> >process.
> >
> >Thoughts, comments?
>
> I agree that auditability is vital. However do we need to define new
> datasets for this or just define an interface/process for accessing
> ones we have already identified?
>
> regards,
> Jason
>
> --
> the FREE e-democracy project - http://www.free-project.org
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>    secure, private & reliable free software for e-democracies
>


_____________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. 

For further details, please see
http://www.gsi.gov.uk/main/gncnotices/gncinformationnotice5_2001.pdf, or
contact your departmental help desk.

The Message Labs trial has been extended until further notice.

In case of problems, please call your organisations IT helpdesk.

		****************************** 
The Cabinet Office's computer systems may be monitored and communications
carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system
and for other lawful purposes.