Re: [OVC-demo-team] Re: Reconciliation System GUI (was: Re: Ballot GUI)

From: Eron Lloyd <elloyd_at_lancaster_dot_lib_dot_pa_dot_us>
Date: Wed Feb 25 2004 - 13:05:56 CST

On Wednesday 25 February 2004 1:14 pm, Alan Dechert wrote:
> > Here is an updated workflow, taking your comments and questions into
> account:
> > 1. User verification/authentication
> > 2. Input two witness names
> > 3. Input voting station data disc(s) serial number(s)
> The disk serial numbers would be entered into the system BEFORE voting
> begins. This helps to defeat an attempt to switch CDs after voting. The
> admin PC has to know in advance the serial number of the disk it expects to
> get from the voting station. So this part is not really part of the Ballot
> Reconciliation Procedure: It's part of the set up procedure (CDs are
> removed from sealed envelop from county HQ; serial numbers entered into
> admin PC; pollworker inserts appropriate CD in voting machine, locks the
> cage and boots up--witnessed by two people). The relevant operation for
> the BRP you have as #6.

You're right--I don't know why that's there. That and a list of poll workers
will already be stored in the application. Any dummy names, values you're
thinking of? Does it matter how this is stored (right now, anyways)?

> When it prompts for the disk for voting machine #2, it should read the
> serial number from the disk and compare that to what it has on file. Is
> there something like GetCDSerialNumber() in the API?

Not like that, but it should be... I'll take a look.

> > 4. Manual voted paper ballot count; input total
> > 5. Voted paper ballots scanned/each ballot counted and serialized to
> > filesystem as XML file in <scanned ballots>/ folder
> > 6. Collect voting station data, counting and transferring each file to
> > filesystem in <stored ballots>/ folder
> > 7. Input ID numbers for test ballots that were printed on start up
> > 8. Register known spoiled ballots
> > 9. Compute/report errors on totals, comparing ballot count/scan vs. vote
> > station data:
> > ((#4 - (#7 + #8)) == (#5 - (#7 - #8)) == (#6 - (#7 + #8)))
> I don't get your math here. #6 - (#7 + #8) gives the number of unaccounted
> for ballots.

#6 - (#7 + #8) gives you the total on the disc ballots minus test & spoiled
ones (for totals, anyways), plus any missing ballots. That had nothing to do
for actual comparisons though. I was thinking about raw totals, but forgot
about them also including any potential missing ballots.

> #4 and #5 has to be the same. After the manual count is entered (say 501),
> the number of ballots scanned (and the number of xml files written) would
> be incremented and displayed until you reach 501.


> We have [nearly] standardized the format for this XML files. I'm hoping
> Jan and Fred will nail this down. I have been trying to get it nailed down
> for some time now.

Sounds good. This gives me enough to get started. Let's try to get those
format finalizations hammered out.


[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Thu Apr 1 02:40:21 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 02:40:36 CST