Title: 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:]
Sent: 09 March 2011 14:56
To: John Borras
Cc: EML TC
Subject: RE: [election-services] Reviewing EML against needs for UOCAVA
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:]
Sent: 2011-03-07 2:33 AM
To: 'EML TC'
Subject: RE: [election-services] Reviewing EML against needs for UOCAVA
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:]
Sent: 03 March 2011 16:16
To: EML TC
Subject: [election-services] Reviewing EML against needs for UOCAVA
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
