RE: [election-services] GAO VVSG response item #1

["Paul Spencer" <paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk>]

David,

This looks good. I am not sure why you split the types of records into two
categories (one specifying EML and one not). Also, should we only talk about
the transfer of records for EML since the process is just for reference?

You may have good reasons I don't understand for wording it the way you
have. Here is an attempt that makes these two changes:

<vote_process_terms>
Digital vote records, audit trail control and vote process configuration and
control scripts should be implemented, stored and prepared using open public
specifications and process definitions that can be independently verified
and with which compatibility can be certified. The transfer of such records
should use formats defined by freely and openly available public
specifications that utilize content markup language techniques such as the
widely adopted Extensible Markup Language (XML) syntax. An example of such a
format is the OASIS Election Markup Language (EML), which is royalty free
and provides open public license terms.
</vote_process_terms>

The only problem I can see with this is that the EML reference is in a
sentence by itself, and so is easy to just delete. Perhaps a greater
embedding into the text would help that.

Regards

Paul Spencer
Director
Boynings Consulting Ltd
http://boynings.co.uk


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Webber (XML) [mailto:david@drrw.info]
> Sent: 09 July 2005 17:58
> To: election-services@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [election-services] GAO VVSG response item #1
>
>
> Team,
>
> The clock is ticking on developing a response
> to the GAO VVSG document.
>
> As a first step I'd like to suggest to GAO that
> the VVSG should recommend voting systems
> conform to open public specifications.
>
> Here's my first blush at this - please feel free to
> improve / refine, etc.
>
> You can never make this 100% - it will depend to
> some extent on the vendor adopting not just the
> sense of this but the spirit too. And this wording
> leaves it open enough that the vendor(s)
> can adopt some other appropriate standard, or
> contribute to the development and extension of,
> provided it is both open public and independently
> verifiable.
>
>
> The goal here is to have something that GAO /
> NIST can feel comfortable with as generic
> terminology that describes the type of behaviour
> generally preferred - and then States can ask
> for that in RFPs for equipment and solutions.
>
> Thanks, DW
>
> <vote_process_terms>
> Digital vote records, audit trail control and vote process configuration
> and control scripts should be implemented, stored and prepared using
> formats defined by freely and openly available public specifications
> that utilize content markup language techniques such as the widely
> adopted eXtensible Markup Language (XML) syntax and derived
> methods.   Also the vote record formats themselves and handling
> associated to them should conform to open public specifications
> and process definitions that can be independently verified and
> compatibility certified to, such as the OASIS Election Markup
> Language (EML) process specifications that are royalty free
> and provide open public license terms.
> </vote_process_terms>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your
> TCs in OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>