[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [election-services] Reviewing EML against needs for UOCAVA
Peter – thanks for this. Would be good if we could confirm this in-house before it goes to IEEE please. David – can you confirm Peter’s assessments or suggest how the “missing” bits might be addressed in v6. If they are missing then we need to add them to v7. John From: Zelechoski, Peter [mailto:pzelechoski@essvote.com] John – It took me a few extra days but I finally got through reviewing the prior P1622 needs against the v6 of EML. I have attached that analysis. - Peter From: John Borras [mailto:johnaborras@yahoo.co.uk] Hi All Is anyone in a position to help Peter please? If we don’t have an answer is this something to fix in v7? John From: Zelechoski, Peter [mailto:pzelechoski@essvote.com] I have been reviewing the previous IEEE work (not done yet, but still hope to be done tomorrow as promised). I know the 330 voter list has elements to allow specification of the ballot forms a voter is entitled to. BUT – not all Voter Registration systems know the ballot forms; some only know the polling station grouping a voter is associated with. As a consequence, I am looking for a message that supports the need to communicate the ballot forms that go with a given polling station grouping. Can anyone give me a nudge? - Peter |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]