Peter thanks for the comments. I think what you are saying supports my view that we can add further layers of detail, if required, but at a later stage. For now this should suffice.
John
From: Zelechoski, Peter []
Sent: 15 January 2010 15:29
To: John Borras;
Subject: RE: [election-services] EML v6 DATA MODELS
For those that operate better on visual representations, these may help them to understand the way the EML schema ties things together. I don't know if
it is at a level the requestors want but I think it is a good reference point for us to start with. I do like having layers of increasing detail so that you can abstract and not have to weed through the details unless you are looking for something specific
at a given layer.
From: John Borras [mailto:]
Sent: 2010-01-15 4:48 AM
To:
Subject: [election-services] EML v6 DATA MODELS
One of the requests received in the Public Review process was the need for a data model to support v6. This request also came out very strongly in the NIST workshop before Christmas. So to meet this I have
produced the attached set of models. I propose to revise the Spec Doc to include the top-level model, see Part 3.3 doc attached, and then make available the zip file containing all the lower-level models to compliment and supplement
the Data Dictionary.
I'd appreciate any views on this approach and the draft models I've prepared please. Data modelling can be a very subjective and contentious discipline and I have no intention of really deep diving into the finite detail of all this.
What I've produced shows the major business entities and business data used in v6 and I believe is
sufficient to meet the request at this stage. If subsequently we find that it does not fulfil the need then we can do further work on it at a later stage.
John
