RE: [election-services] EML BUSINESS CASE

["David RR Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

John,

 

OK - I'll bite!  The first page needs some wordsmithing at minimum - I'll invest editing in some suggestions - and improving the message on how standards 101 create a better more stable marketplace longterm.  There's a few places in the document where better layout and formatting will aid delivery of the message too. I just finished writing something for WSJ and their author layout guidelines look like they could be handy here too (more standards!?!).  Otherwise - the document does appear to be hitting most of the key points - just seems like cleaner organization would help - and also a ToC page...

 

Seems like there is a complimentary executive briefing to this - on what will happen if you just let market forces rule - the American experience!

 

I notice that for example the law suit just filed in Florida alleging failures of the voting systems there that led to an improper election result.  A simple undervote warning message on screen could have made all the difference but was not implemented.  Could that have been avoided by using standards and having formal certification and conformance test suites?

 

Similarly - the cost of certification itself - and proprietary software solutions - for example NYC recently required vendors to under go certification that costs $280K - before they even consider who they will give contracts to.

Ultimately the customers pick up the tab for all this - and in the case of Maryland that to date has spent $100M and counting on its voting machines - that works out around $50 per voter per ballot cast!

 

Clearly having folks like the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the US - actually get funding to investigate use of voting standards and develop test and confirmance suites would pay back 100 fold on whatever that may cost.  However right now America has collectively spent $2B on voting systems but has no way to measure the quality and assurance of those systems.

 

As they say in the Guinness beer advertisements over here "BRILLIANT!".

 

DW

"The way to be is to do" - Confucius (551-472 B.C.)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [election-services] EML BUSINESS CASE
From: John Borras <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Tue, November 28, 2006 6:57 am
To: EML TC <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>

You may remember that I pushed out a draft of this document earlier this year and asked for comments.  None were received.  But having been to the Council of Europe meeting last week, during which EML was re-affirmed as the recommended standard to be used by Member States, there is a need to get this published as soon as possible.  There are still many mis-conceptions about EML, particularly about localising it, and many countries haven't started the e-voting journey yet and need some help and education about where and how to start.  I believe this document will serve these purposes very well.   So could I have any comments on the latest draft, which is on the TC website in the Related Documents folder, in the next few days please.  I will take silence as acceptance.
 

Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com