Re: 80 race capacity

From: Douglas W. Jones <jones_at_cs_dot_uiowa_dot_edu>
Date: Wed May 19 2004 - 15:50:58 CDT

On May 19, 2004, at 2:47 PM, charlie strauss wrote:

> So I guess one could assume this is the minimum info the NASED
> director would like.

Standards for voter-verified paper ballots with touch screen input don't
exist yet, so what the NASED director would like is not really relevant.

> I dont understand the previous suggestion that it appear like the
> ballot card. Or what the grey edging is all about.

The formatting on the voter-verified ballot should look strikingly
to that in the presentation of the ballot on the screen. If something
printed on a paisley background on the screen to set it off from other
on the screen, then it would be sensible to present it on the
ballot on a paisley background. Don't do sans-serif text on the
screen, and
then put the same item in cursive on the voter-verified ballot.

There are no standards dictating such rules, although California is
drafting standards that will get the ball rolling.

But, rules like this will come out, I predict, because it's essential
the voter not be surprised by the presentation on the voter-verified

> Obviously having it look like the ballot card would be nice but only
> could
> work for small ballots.

You'll have to make it look similar even for large ballots (but don't
refer to it as a ballot card. Your target is to have the presentation
of the sample ballot, as printed in the newspaper or mailed to the voter
before the election, match the presentation on screen, which should
the presentation on the voter verifiable receipt. Perfect match won't
happen because paper cannnot match computer screens, but there should be
no gratuitous differences.

                        Doug Jones
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Mon May 31 23:17:54 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon May 31 2004 - 23:18:16 CDT