|
HFP
Subcommittee Teleconference
Friday, September 29, 2006
Agenda:
0. TGDC and EAC
updates from Allan, John Wack
1. Status of usability
testing research, CIF template, Sharon
2. Discussion #2
of VVSG version 2 draft:
- Section 3.2.3 Functional Capabilities through 3.2.9.3 - C.
3. Other progress
and items, Sharon
Participants:
Alexis Scott-Morrison, Alice Miller, Allan Eustis, David Flater, John
Cugini, John Wack, Nelson Hastings, Philip Pearce, Sharon Laskowski, Wendy
Havens,
Whitney Quesenbery
Meeting commenced
at 11:00 a.m.
Administrative
Updates:
- Allan: Spent part
of last week in Washington state observing the primary canvassing and
post-election certification procedures. All four of the major vendors
have DREs in various counties in Washington.
- Allan: Will send
out a URL for the house hearings regarding paper trails. HFP items were
discussed. (URL: http://boss.streamos.com/real/houseadmin/09282006-final.smi)
- Allan: Continuing
to work to get Philip Pearce/Tricia Mason formally on board as members
of the TGDC.
- John Wack: Has
been reviewing the report on Cuyahoga County election problems and been
finding issues on usability problems with Diebold systems, as well as
usability with audit procedures. Having issues with what to do with
paper spools, they are usable but aren't. There are privacy issues,
but spools keep all records together for easier handling. He is putting
white paper together which he will send out for comments.
- Sharon: Met with
Susan Roth. Susan is finishing up task to identify all the issues on
developing usability report/performance bench marks to be used by vendors
and what are the issues for test labs. Final draft will be sent around.
Other research in progress. We will get enough results through our testing
efforts to go in VVSG 07 before March.
Draft HFP Section
of VVSG
John Cugini walked
the subcommittee through the following sections of the draft HFP sections
for VVSG 2007:
3.2.3 Functional
Capabilities - Basic things machines can do to make life (VOTING) easier
- Whitney's general
comments about structure and complexity have already been noted.
- Discussed over-voting,
under-voting, and correctional ballots
- Discussed system
capabilities
3.2.3.1 Editable
Interfaces
- Whitney's list
of understandable words were helpful for this section
- In this section,
Whitney would like to change the wording from autonomous to independent.
- Machines that
allow you to make changes as you go
- Contest navigation
requirement: make it a shall
3.2.3.2 Non-Editable
Interfaces (such as manually marked paper ballots and optical scans
- Over-voting and
under-voting should be kept separate in write-up
- Under-voting is
less controversial because it does not cause cancellation of votes or
question of choices such as over-voting, therefore, the severity of
it is different.
3.2.4 Cognitive Issues
- Major discussion
on this section.
- There shouldn't
be hidden capabilities.
- Alexis has concerns
about the statement dealing with "voter should be able to operate
system and understand their actions". This is a sticky issue for
election officials.
- Whitney: At what
point do we say that a system in intelligible for enough people? We
have to remember these are goals - and we are writing specific requirements
to meet these goals.
- Sub-requirements
of these sections are written in the "should" mode.
- David Flater pointed
out an issue from VVSG 05 regarding error (warning) messages to the
voter- need to be "abundantly clear".
- John Cugini will
take a look at the comments about poll worker "error" messages
and analyze them and how they may need to be rewritten.
- Operational messages
need to be specific.
- Part of Jenny
Redish's task is to make our "words" more understandable
- Poll workers and
voters need to know that help features and instructions are available
if necessary, machines need to have a help function built in.
- John Cugini is
going to draft up a requirement about icon usage - icons must also come
with contemporaneous written English.
- The use of color
on the machine displays was discussed.
- Whitney mentioned
that we need to include "Design for Democracy" research
3.2.5 Perceptual
Issues
- Generalize minimum
font sizes for any ballot - keep them parallel
- Need to think
about people who have trouble seeing (not the blind) - issues with magnifying
the screen print.
- For accessible
systems: bigger font size
3.2.6 Interaction
Issues
- Carry over from
VVSG 2005. Covers no page scrolling, unambiguous feedback and accidental
activation.
3.2.6.1 Timing Issues
- This is a new
section.
- Whitney has no
major comments on the requirements; this section is quite well done.
Could use a few more words.
- Sharon would like
to run this by the vendors through ITAA.
NOTE: Whitney - Before
we get into the accessibility section, including alternative languages
, we should have the members appointed to the Access Board participating
. Wait until next telcon.
3.2.7 Alternative
Languages (this section was touched on only briefly)
- A large portion
of this section was rewritten.
3.2.8 Privacy
- Any warning messages
that are given should protect voter privacy.
- Privacy of overvote
should be generalized.
- VVSG 2005 ambiguous
on "receipts".
NOTE: Whitney - We
need to identify "big issues" that need to be discussed before
the December meeting.
Next teleconference
is scheduled for October 20, 2006, at 2:00 p.m. ET.
************
Link
to NIST HAVA PageLast updated: July 25, 2007
Point of Contact
Privacy
policy / security notice / accessibility statement
Disclaimer
/ FOIA
NIST is an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department
|