John, all -
If they are discussing the EDX that was submitted to IEEE
for consideration by P1622, it was created by Hart-InterCivic. Both EDX
and EML had holes; most of those were fixed by us (EML TC); Hart never
completely addressed all of their holes. If there is someone influencing
this it would probably be from that venue.
The one thing we do know is that the individual at NIST
that originally looked at EML was predisposed to look at EML as not U.S.
centric, as many have been. That is an unfortunate situation because I
have been able to make it do whatever I needed by opening up my mind a
bit.
- Peter
From: John Borras [mailto:]
Sent: 2009-05-12 4:31 AM
To:
Cc:
Subject: [election-services]
EML v6 : EAC REQUIREMENTS
David
One aspect that we really need to do our homework on before
we finalise v6 is the ongoing debate around the EAC’s Voting Systems
Requirements. The story as far as I know it to date is as
follows:
The EAC put out for public comment the draft requirements
prepared by its TDGC committee, see http://www.eac.gov/files/vvsg/Final-TGDC-VVSG-08312007.pdf
and in particular Section 6.6 Integratability
and Data Export/Interchange.
The majority of public comments received favoured a much more
positive line on the sue of an open standard for data interchange and supported
the use of EML in that context.
The NIST recommendations to the EAC committee following the
public comments is available at http://www.eac.gov/program-areas/voting-systems/voluntary-voting-guidelines/index_html/?searchterm=voting%20systems%20guidelines
and not surprisingly they are rather dismissive of EML saying it’s not up
to the job etc.
At a recent meeting of the committee EDX was brought into the
equation as the more likely standard to use. Where and how that has
suddenly emerged from as it wasn’t part of the original consultation document I
don’t know. My inside sources however told me that there was no discussion
on this point at the meeting.
The EAC committee has not finalised its new Guidelines but
instead has gone off down the road of looking into testing and
certification.
I am trying to get Laurent Liscia to take up his seat on the
EAC committee.
So the least we should do is double-check that we can meet
all the requirements set out in the original TDGC document and the subsequent
NIST report. Thereafter we will have to rely on politics and our
supporters to press our case plus hopefully in the not too distant future being
able to cite ourselves as the ISO standard for e-voting.
John
