[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [election-services] High-Level Process Model
John et al. Actually, I have one of IFES' election experts taking a look at our High-Level Process and am waiting from comments back from him (including audit issues). The gentleman in question is Jeff Fischer, a rather highly regarded election specialist who recently worked with the United Nations on the East Timor elections last year. I should have his comments sometime tomorrow. TJ -----Original Message----- From: John G Ross [mailto:secstan@email.msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 10:14 AM To: TJ Rainsford; Jason Kitcat; 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 I agree we need to give more thought to the audit process. Has anybody got a list of what the audit requirements for current voting system are? For example, I can assume there is an audit requirement to proof that all the voting processes were legitamate at the time of the vote. But I do not belive we need to be able to audit who voted for what, that information should remain private to the voter, do we all agree? Regards John Ross -----Original Message----- From: TJ Rainsford [mailto:TRainsford@ifes.org] Sent: 04 December 2001 14:35 To: Jason Kitcat; 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 Greetings Everyone: I am going to run our proposed Process Model past some of the election experts here at IFES to see if we can get any additional suggestions and comments. I will forward my notes along before the end of the week. 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? TJ TJ Rainsford IT Advisor IFES -----Original Message----- From: Jason Kitcat [mailto:jeep@free-project.org] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 10:17 AM To: 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' Subject: RE: [election-services] High-Level Process Model At 3:13 pm +0000 30/11/01, John Ross wrote: >I concur with Jason's process model, but I think we need to include extra >interface points (6 to 10) were we need to define XML schema. I totally agree - I left out further interface points because I didn't know how you might want to apply the existing proposed interfaces to the new model... regards, Jason -- The FREE e-democracy project ---------------------------------------- http://www.free-project.org ---------------------------------------- secure, private and reliable Free Software ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC