RE: [election-services] EML BUSINESS CASE

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [election-services] EML BUSINESS CASE
From: "Paul Spencer" <paul.spencer@boynings.co.uk>
Date: Wed, November 29, 2006 4:31 am
To: "John Borras" <johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk>, "EML TC"
<election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>

John,

I agree with David's point about formatting. It needs white space between
paragraphs. I always use a paragraph style in Word that leaves a 6pt gap.

I think an executive summary would help. About half a page, but this is all
I would put on the front page.

In the Introduction the phrase "The implementation of electronic voting
would allow increased access to the voting process for millions of potential
voters" seems rather out of date now. Perhaps replace "would allow" with
"allows" and change the focus from e-voting being good to EML making
e-voting work better. Later parts in this paragraph need to change to match,
but the following paragraph illustrates exactly what I mean. Administrations
already want e-voting, the problem is that it is seen to have problems, and
these problems stem from the use of proprietary systems.

Don't forget that EML is about more than e-voting. I would stress in the
Introduction that it can be (and is being) used for electoral registration
and can be used for e-counting in paper-based elections. Peter Brown has
contributed before on how useful it would be if a standard such as EML were
used to communicate counts in European elections.

In the Benefits of EML section, we concentrate on the "convenience" aspects
for purchasers and suppliers. Could David supply more on how EML supports
security and trustworthiness? Ultimately, these are the major benefits. The
current list was made before we knew that current proprietary systems just
can't be trusted. This section also needs reformatting.

Do we need the terminology section in this document?

I think the Trustworthy Elections section is the key. There is a section
near the end "The responsibility of providing trustworthy elections must be
shared by all involved including Election Managers, Governments and
Suppliers; democracy relies on it. Developments like EML make that
provision possible whether it is for a traditional or e-enabled election." I
think we need to say *how* EML does that when compared to proprietary
solutions.

It is good to have a SWOT analysis, but again, it is comparing e-voting to
paper, not EML to proprietary solutions.

If we can agree on the key points, I think that between us we could halve
the size of the document and make it much more focussed. As a start:

EML ...

... makes e-voting more trustworthy. How?

... is an open standard. How does that help?

... allows "mix and match" of equipment.

... reduces the need for suppliers to customise equipment between
administrations

... provides common interfaces from different equipment suppliers (e.g. UK
CORE project).

... can be used for any electronic part of the election process:
registration, e-voting, communication of count.

Perhaps we should start with the SWOT, then work around this. I'll think
about that later today or on Friday.

Regards

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: John Borras [mailto:johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: 28 November 2006 11:57
To: EML TC
Subject: [election-services] EML BUSINESS CASE

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

election-services message