Re: [election-services] RE: EML v5.0

Mary

I appreciate you are trying to improve the quality of OASIS standards but the timing of your request is really very frustrating. I have busted a gut to get this to you at the earliest possible opportunity for Public Review as the TC wants to get v5 approved as a full standard and into ISO without delay. I've already spent many hours converting the documents to XHTML format which according to your recent missive I didn't really have to right now. Now you want to introduce further delay. You've had ample opportunity to makes these new requirements known to me during the Committee Draft stage. Introducing them now at this late stage is really not on.

I don't know whose idea the new QA templates is but it is flawed. For a QA to be effective it should be carried out by an independent third party not the originator of the artifact. If I have to do it I would naturally tick all the boxes and that would prove nothing. I suggest you re-think this process.

Will you please proceed as I have requested and we can deal with your new requirements in future iterations of this version of the standard.

Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745

----- Original Message ----
From: Mary McRae <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
To: John Borras <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: EML TC <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wednesday, 14 March, 2007 9:25:31 PM
Subject: [election-services] RE: EML v5.0

Hi John,

I'm going to let you be one of the first to test drive the new Specification Quality checklist:

http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/QAChecklist.html

One other bit that staff is trying to improve practices related to "multi-part specifications". I think it would be more accurate if each of the documents displayed the title: Election Markup Language Version 5.0 and then underneath that the specific document title (without a version number), i.e.:

Election Markup Language (EML) Version 5.0

Schema Descriptions

Election Markup Language (EML) Version 5.0

EML Process and Data Requirements

That way each will be clearly identified that the individual document is not a specification unto itself but part of a larger set.

Regards,

Mary

From: John Borras [mailto:johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 4:03 PM
To: Mary Mcrae
Cc: EML TC
Subject: EML v5.0

Mary

The E&VS TC has approved the new version of EML as a Committee Draft and also agreed that it should now go out for Public Review prior to adopting it as a Committee Specification. Will you please do the necessary distribution on our behalf.

All the necessary documentation is available at http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=22948&wg_abbrev=election . The following files are in the referenced zip folder:

- Changes Log (rtf format)

- Process and Data Requirements (html and pdf formats)

- Schema Descriptions (html and pdf formats)

- Data Dictionary (Excel format)

- XML Schemas

In addition to your usual distribution will you please send the Public Review notice to the people listed in the attached file. These are members of the Council of Europe e-voting working group.

Please let me know if there are any problems with any of this.

Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745

To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

election-services message