Hi
Rich
Thanks
for taking the time to review this document. It’s always
good to have a fresh pair of eyes reading it.
Whilst
I’m happy to take on board some of your suggested changes,
as David has said below some of the terminology and phrases we’ve used
are very
deliberate and are ones that we have been using in all our white papers
and presentations
so I would want to hold to those.
Time
is now running out for the submission, so unless you have
any fundamental objections as opposed to textual preferences to the
attached revision
I’ll post it tomorrow?
David,
That's fine, use only what you think improves the text. I tried to
keep
the original meaning as I understood it. In the example you give, the
original text I was working from had "influence" in quotes:
Since democracy was invented people have sought to
"influence" the result of a vote
Quoting is often imprecise and in this case I thought it eluded to
improper
influence. I removed the quotes and attempted to make the meaning
explicit.
Rich
On 07/24/2010 03:26 PM, David RR Webber (XML) wrote:
Sorry
I'm not concurring with much of this.
While
some punctuation and light edits will improve the readability - I'm
seeing
that many of the edits you are proposing are also fundamentally
changing the
meaning and emphasis of the sentences.
E.g.
Since
democracy was invented, people have sought ways to illicitly influence
the
outcome of a vote.
is
very different from: Since
democracy was invented, people have sought ways to influence the result
of a
vote.
I'd
be happy with minor edits here, but not with larger changes.
Plus
many pieces of text you are suggesting changes to are ones that in the
past we
have found acceptable for purpose and used in previous changes, or are
taken
from source documents such as the EML specification or EU documents.
If
I had to choose - I'd prefer sticking with John's text as is - without
further
edits - as this just opening up too many more issues at this point.
--------
Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [election-services] OASIS NIST UOCAVA Submission
From: Richard Cardone <richcar@magneticpotato.net>
Date: Sat, July 24, 2010 1:36 pm
To: EML TC <election-services@lists.oasis-open.org>
John,
I was unable to keep up with the discussion this week, but that may
work
to our advantage since I was able to take a fresh look at the final
product. Attached is the last version of the document that you posted
with my proposed edits. Most of my changes are intended to help the
flow of the document. I set change recording on to aid in
before-and-after comparisons. I used OpenOffice, so I hope everything
is viewable in MS Word. Just in case, I also attached the pdf version
so you can at least see the way things are supposed to look.
Overall, I think I reduced the amount of text slightly, so it still
fits
into a title page plus 4 content pages. The only area that I think
might need some work is the section on the Electoral Assurance
Framework. The definition and background of this term are never given,
so the reader is not sure if it's an EML term, an industry term, an
evolving standard, etc. Another sentence or so is probably all that's
needed.
Regards,
Rich
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php