Further to my note below, the comments submitted by David Rosenburg centre around the aspects of STV or RTV voting. Has anyone got any first-hand experience of these approaches and thus could help
with assessing the comments raised and the required solutions please? The comments are available at
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/election-services-comment/200911/maillist.html so please take the time to review them and feed back thoughts on this mailing list.
On a wider aspect, the vast majority of the work on v6.0 has been done by David Webber and I for one am extremely grateful to him for his efforts. But he could do with some help please in reviewing and responding to comments
received during the Public Review period and also the current spate of activity with NIST and IEEE, see below. Could I ask for volunteers please to help spread the load.
Thanks
John
From: John Borras
Sent: 04 November 2009 10:49
To:
Subject: EML UPDATE
Hi All
Thought I would give you a brief update on a number of recent activities. We will need to have a TC meeting to discuss these in more detail soon but I want to let things progress a little further before doing that.
1. EML v6.0 Public Review
You may have seen a number (6) of comments submitted by David Rosenburg. Don't be alarmed, David W and I have been talking to him over these last few weeks and essentially agreed these comments up front with him. They should
not involve large scale changes to v6.0 but they will just add another refinement. Rest assured any changes will need TC agreement.
2. NIST Workshop
David and I presented at the NIST Data Formats workshop last week and all the feedback has been very positive. It looks as though NIST's recommendation coming out of this will be first for them to work with us, ie join the
TC, to review and modify EML as necessary to fully meet the needs of USA elections as they see it, and then second for them to endorse EML as the USA standard. We don't believe their review will throw up anything significant but they want to go through that
process to assure themselves. So we have a number of steps still to go through but it looks like the end product will be very favourable for us.
3. IEEE P1622 Committee
This committee ahs been resurrected and the new chair, Duncan Buell, and I will be talking tomorrow prior to its first meeting, later tomorrow, about how he can quickly and easily align his committee's work with EML v6.0.
He was at the NIST workshop and the read across between his work and ours was discussed and a convergence was clearly the wish of the audience and NIST.
So a number of strands that need to be drawn together and progressed over the next few weeks and then we can move very positively on and into ISO etc.
More news as it arises.
Regards
John
