John -
I like it. I would change the title to "Top Reasons
..." because there are 2 different numbered groups and lots of reasons on the
flier.
Also, the first line item under number 4 on the front page
should have the word "to" inserted so it reads "I want to
provide..."
- Peter
From: John Borras
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008
4:30 AM
To: Zelechoski, Peter; David RR Webber (XML)
Cc: EML
TC; Carol Geyer
Subject: Re: [election-services] Fw: Top 10 Reasons
for using EML -- this time withthe attachment
Peter/David/everyone
How about the attached as a back-to-back landscape flyer? This way
we've got room for more Requirements which would make the case for
EML even more compelling?
Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745
Skype: gov3john
From: "Zelechoski, Peter"
<>
To: David RR Webber (XML)
<>
Cc:
John Borras <>; EML TC
<>
Sent: Monday, 17 November, 2008
21:58:17
Subject: RE:
[election-services] Fw: Top 10 Reasons for using EML -- this time withthe
attachment
That sounds great. I like the two page approach with the expanded
information for them to drill into. I also agree that we don't need
numbers on the first page -- that's just how Word did it when I did my
copy/paste.
From: David RR Webber (XML)
[mailto:]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 2:34
PM
To: Zelechoski, Peter
Cc: John Borras; EML
TC
Subject: RE: [election-services] Fw: Top 10 Reasons for using EML
-- this time withthe attachment
Peter,
Makes sense! What we have here is a two page broadsheet.
On the first page are the Election Solution Requirements - and then on
the second is the value proposition!
I don't think we need to # number the items on the first page - there's
basically 3 areas - Voter, Administrator, Provider.
Then I'd add a 4th area - State and Federal Management with few
more bullets for :
- We need to select cost effective solutions that my State /
Country can afford
- We must be able to upgrade seamlessly without having to replace my
entire investment
- Our approach needs open accountability methods that are
verifiable publically
Thanks, DW
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [election-services]
Fw: Top 10 Reasons for using EML --
this time with the attachment
From:
"Zelechoski, Peter" <>
Date: Mon, November 17,
2008 2:46 pm
To: "John Borras" <>, "EML
TC"
<>
John, et al. -
Yes, the US election is finally over. Maybe now I will have a few
minutes to do these other things.
I took a look at the current draft John provided in his November 10th
eMail. I took the liberty of adding a segment to the top as a discussion
starter. I believe the current points discuss benefits of EML but they
don't necessarily address why I should want to use EML.
I have been involved in elections in UK, Europe, Canada, US, Mexico,
Portugal. In all cases, the local people involved in running the
election have no idea of what EML is and have even less focus on why they
should care. They are simply looking for a way to manage their election
and publish the results. They all have a need to increase the
auditability and openness so that their voters/electors can gain confidence in
the process and its results but they don't necessarily think about that or
think to tie that to EML (or any other technology
solution).
Maybe I'm off base with my comments but I offer them
nonetheless.
- Peter
From: John Borras [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 3:31 AM
To: EML
TC
Subject: [election-services] Fw: Top 10 Reasons for using
EML
Hopefully the dust has settled now after the USA elections and we can
resume work on our Top 10 paper. Attached is the latest draft and
this reflects all the comments I've received to date.
You'll see from my previous e-mail below I posed a number of questions
about how we should take this forward. In my opinion we should take the
following course of action:
- I think we should just concentrate on a single global Top 10
list. Producing localised versions would almost certainly introduce
problems keeping all versions in line and retaining consistency of
messages.
- Having compared the draft List with our White Paper I think we should
issue the Top 10 list as a stand-alone paper but reference the White
Paper for further details. There is not a direct one-for-one correlation
between the Top 10 list and the White Paper but all points in the List are
indirectly covered in the White Paper. To make direct
cross-references would require a significant re-write of the White Paper and I
don't feel the effort required is necessary or warranted.
So can we now agree the content of the draft attached and also my
approach above please? Once I have that agreement I'll talk to Carol
Geyer about presentation and distribution of the List. Any thoughts on
those aspects would be appreciated.
Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745
Skype: gov3john
----- Forwarded Message ----
From: John Borras
<>
To: EML TC
<>
Cc: Carol Geyer
<>
Sent: Sunday, 26 October, 2008
11:36:44
Subject: Re: [FWD:
Re: [FWD: RE: [election-services] Top 10 Reasons for using
EML]]
Thanks for all the contributions to date. I suggest we now
pause work on this for a couple of weeks to allow some of our colleagues
to complete their commitments on the USA election and catch-up on these
discussions. In the meantime I'll consolidate the comments I've had so
far and look at linking the Top 10 list to our EML White
Paper.
When we resume discussions after the USA election I'd
like opinions please on the following:
- should we produce a single global Top 10 list, or go for a number
of localised versions that concentrate more on local concerns?
- do we issue this as a separate stand-alone document, or do we link it
directly to our White Paper, or do we integrate it as the front page of
the White Paper?
More in a couple of weeks.
Regards
John
M. +44 (0)7976 157745
Skype: gov3john
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
