RE: [election-services] Fw: Top 10 Reasons for using EML -- this time wi

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [election-services] Fw: Top 10 Reasons for using EML --
this time with the attachment
From: "Zelechoski, Peter" <pzelechoski@essvote.com>
Date: Mon, November 17, 2008 2:46 pm
To: "John Borras" <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>, "EML TC"
<election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>

John, et al. -

Yes, the US election is finally over. Maybe now I will have a few minutes to do these other things.

I took a look at the current draft John provided in his November 10th eMail. I took the liberty of adding a segment to the top as a discussion starter. I believe the current points discuss benefits of EML but they don't necessarily address why I should want to use EML.

I have been involved in elections in UK, Europe, Canada, US, Mexico, Portugal. In all cases, the local people involved in running the election have no idea of what EML is and have even less focus on why they should care. They are simply looking for a way to manage their election and publish the results. They all have a need to increase the auditability and openness so that their voters/electors can gain confidence in the process and its results but they don't necessarily think about that or think to tie that to EML (or any other technology solution).

Maybe I'm off base with my comments but I offer them nonetheless.

- Peter

From: John Borras [mailto:johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 3:31 AM
To: EML TC
Subject: [election-services] Fw: Top 10 Reasons for using EML

Hopefully the dust has settled now after the USA elections and we can resume work on our Top 10 paper. Attached is the latest draft and this reflects all the comments I've received to date.

You'll see from my previous e-mail below I posed a number of questions about how we should take this forward. In my opinion we should take the following course of action:

- I think we should just concentrate on a single global Top 10 list. Producing localised versions would almost certainly introduce problems keeping all versions in line and retaining consistency of messages.

- Having compared the draft List with our White Paper I think we should issue the Top 10 list as a stand-alone paper but reference the White Paper for further details. There is not a direct one-for-one correlation between the Top 10 list and the White Paper but all points in the List are indirectly covered in the White Paper. To make direct cross-references would require a significant re-write of the White Paper and I don't feel the effort required is necessary or warranted.

So can we now agree the content of the draft attached and also my approach above please? Once I have that agreement I'll talk to Carol Geyer about presentation and distribution of the List. Any thoughts on those aspects would be appreciated.

Regards
John

M. +44 (0)7976 157745
Skype: gov3john

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: John Borras <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
To: EML TC <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>
Cc: Carol Geyer <carol.geyer@oasis-open.org>
Sent: Sunday, 26 October, 2008 11:36:44
Subject: Re: [FWD: Re: [FWD: RE: [election-services] Top 10 Reasons for using EML]]

Thanks for all the contributions to date. I suggest we now pause work on this for a couple of weeks to allow some of our colleagues to complete their commitments on the USA election and catch-up on these discussions. In the meantime I'll consolidate the comments I've had so far and look at linking the Top 10 list to our EML White Paper.

When we resume discussions after the USA election I'd like opinions please on the following:

- should we produce a single global Top 10 list, or go for a number of localised versions that concentrate more on local concerns?

- do we issue this as a separate stand-alone document, or do we link it directly to our White Paper, or do we integrate it as the front page of the White Paper?

election-services message