1Introduction |
|
Project |
CYBERVOTE |
Contract |
IST-1999-20338 |
Client |
European Commission | ||
Reference |
CYBERVOTE:WP3:D9:2001 | ||
Issue (draft) |
1.0 |
Date |
26 February 2002 |
Status |
Definitive |
Nature |
Public |
Author(s) |
Anne DE MICHELI |
Organisation |
EADS Systems & Defence Electronics
|
Name |
Role |
Organisation | |
Checked by |
Anne DE MICHELI |
Deliverable leader |
EADS Systems & Defence Electronics |
Approved by |
N. ASOKAN |
WP3 Manager |
NOKIA Research Centre |
Authorised by |
Stéphan BRUNESSAUX |
Project Director |
EADS Systems & Defence Electronics |
Distribution list | |
Name |
Organisation |
Antonis GALETSAS |
European Commission |
Stéphan BRUNESSAUX |
EADS Systems & Defence Electronics |
David PARKINSON |
British Telecommunications |
Antoon BOSSELAERS |
K.U.Leuven Research & Development |
Sébastien LEVY |
Mairie d'Issy-les-Moulineaux |
Karl SCHLICHTING |
Freie Hansestadt Bremen |
N. ASOKAN |
NOKIA Research Centre |
Berry SCHOENMAKERS |
Technische Universiteit Eindhoven |
Leif RYDÉN |
Kista Stadsdelsnämnd |
Synopsis
The purpose of this document is to present the Ergonomics Plan (EP) included in the ergonomics rules.
File name
MSI-WP3.1-D9-V1.0.doc
Amendment History
Version |
Date |
Description |
0.1 |
20 September 2001 |
First draft |
0.2 |
17 October 2001 |
Integration of criteria for elections systems |
0.3 |
24 October 2001 |
Integration of corrections |
0.4 |
9 November 2001 |
Integration of Nokia corrections |
0.5 |
3 December 2001 |
Integration of Nokia contribution |
0.6 |
4 February 2002 |
Integration of the WAI guidelines and corrections |
0.7 |
22 February 2002 |
Integration of Bremen corrections and Nokia contribution |
1.0 |
26 February 2002 |
Final version delivered to the EC. |
Disclaimer
The information in this document is provided as is and no guarantee or warranty is given that the information is fit for any particular purpose. The user thereof uses the information at its sole risk and liability.
Scope of CyberVote
CyberVote, an innovative cyber voting system for internet terminals and mobile phones, is a research and development (RDT) programme being funded by the European Commission, with additional funding from the companies and organisations undertaking the work. It is part of the Information Society Technologies (IST) 1999 programme for research, technology development and demonstration under the fifth framework programme (5th PCRD). It is attached to Key Action 1 “Systems and Services for the Citizens”.
The objective of CyberVote is to demonstrate the first highly secure cyber-voting prototype using mobile and fixed internet technologies. The project will define and implement a CyberVote prototype embedding an innovative voting protocol relying upon the use of advanced cryptographic tools that will be developed to ensure integrity, privacy and authentication of the voters. The prototype will be demonstrated and evaluated on 3 trial applications.
The project is carried out by a consortium led by EADS Systems & Defence Electronics (FR) and grouping together: British Telecommunications (UK), NOKIA Research Centre (FI), K.U.Leuven Research & Development (BE), Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (NL), Freie Hansestadt Bremen (DE), Mairie d'Issy-les-Moulineaux (FR) and Kista Stadsdelsnämnd (SE).
The project officially started on 1 September 2000. It will end on 1 March 2003. The overall budget of the project is 3 243 629 and the total effort is 27.4 man-years.
Executive summary
This report contains the ergonomics plan and rules for the project with recommendations for the design of the graphical user interfaces.
The ergonomics plan consists in defining ergonomics rules that contribute to the acceptability (user-friendliness and trust) of the CyberVote system by all users (voters - including elderly and disabled people - and administrations). Guidelines on Graphical User Interface design choices are defined in order to provide instructions to developers of the client and server components. Special attention is given on how to combine a user-friendly approach with security controls and on how to present the information on the small displays of mobile devices. This task involves a human-factor and ergonomics expert of EADS S&DE. This task involves the NOKIA contribution and is conducted in close co-operation with the end-user partners (BREMEN, ISSY and KISTA).
EADS S&DE and NOKIA first wrote the ergonomic guidelines. Some of these guidelines were then adopted and tested on a for the mock-up that was presented during the IST 2001 event of Düsseldorf (Dec 2001). This mock-up runs on three different platforms (Cf [3] see the parallelism of the scenarios of the three platforms in order to help in developing the mock-up then). This report deals with three different guidelines: Criteria for election systems, ergonomic guidelines written especially for CyberVote project and the WAI guidelines (Web Accessibility Initiative).
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction 8
2 Contents of the plan 10
3 Criteria for election sytems 11
4 Ergonomics guidelines 12
4.1 Ergonomics criteria 13
4.1.1 Guidance 14
4.1.2 Workload 15
4.1.3 Explicit control 16
4.1.4 Adaptability 16
4.1.5 Error management 17
4.1.6 Consistency 17
4.1.7 Significance of codes 17
4.1.8 Compatibility 18
4.2 Ergonomics rules 18
4.2.1 Introduction 18
4.2.2 Guidelines related to colour (look and feel) 18
4.2.3 Guidelines related to symbols 19
4.2.4 Guidelines related to trust 20
4.2.5 Guidelines related to the hardware platform 20
4.2.6 Guidelines related to little displays 22
4.2.7 Guidelines related to “more simplicity” and “less actions” 23
5 WAI guidelines 25
6 References 26
7 Abbreviations and acronyms 27
8 Points of Contact for further information 28
9 ANNEX 1: WAI 29
9.1 Checklist of Checkpoints for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 29
9.2 Abstract 29
9.3 Status of this document 29
9.4 Priorities 30
9.5 Priority 1 checkpoints 30
9.6 Priority 2 checkpoints 31
9.7 Priority 3 checkpoints 33
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Criteria for election systems 11
Figure 2: “8 golden rules” or ergonomic criteria 13
1 INTRODUCTION |
Election systems must meet standards with regard to security, secrecy, equity, and many other criteria, making Internet voting much more challenging than most electronic commerce or electronic government applications.
Human factors must be taken into account in the design of electronic voting, including the development of appropriate guidelines for the design of human interfaces and electronic ballots, as well as approaches to addressing the needs of the disabled, geographically isolated or elderly people.
Principal goals to reach with the ergonomics guidelines are:
· how best to design electronic ballots to present choices clearly and fairly to voters,
· how best to guide users through the process of voting,
· how best to give voters the feeling of security and secrecy of their vote like in a polling station
· how best the evaluators of the prototype respond to alternative ballot designs. Ballot design for small screens will be particularly challenging.
1.1 Role of the Ergonomics Plan |
|
This document is the ergonomics plan (EP). This document defines the guidelines and ergonomics rules for our voting context.
In our case, we only specify guidelines and ergonomics rules for our voting context. Such a plan aims to warrant the user acceptance and keep the quality of the project to a high level.
This plan ensures the acceptability (user-friendliness, usability, usefulness and trustworthiness) of the CyberVote system to all users (voters and administrations). Special attention will be given on how to combine a user-friendly approach with security controls and how to present the information on the small displays of mobile devices. For example, the trust of the user is reinforced by the presence of the padlock during a secure connection for a payment. This choice of design results from the consideration of the psychological part of Human Factors.
1.2 Applicable ergonomics requirements |
|
The EP was written by a team, which was constituted by an ergonomics expert of EADS S&DE and by the end-users (BREMEN, ISSY and KISTA) and NOKIA. This team has defined the ergonomics plan to:
· be based on ergonomic criteria [6] [7]
· be based on the general ergonomics rules [5] [8] [9]
· include the specific ergonomics guidelines [1] [2] [3] which already contains some rules directly in the scenario. For example, the definition of an information window is the following: for the PC, “we propose an information box” ; for the COMPAQ iPAQ, “words must be more precise and shorter. The OK button is on the right upper corner of this window” ; And for the Nokia 9210, “words must be more precise and shorter. The OK button is the first of the four buttons on the right side”.[4],
· include the WAI guidelines [13].
1.3 language facility |
|
Through this document, we speak about only one mock-up on three different platforms but we often use “the three mock-ups” meaning that we speak about the mock-up on each platform. The term mock-up refers to our first public demonstration of an Internet voting system. This demonstration was carried out in Düsseldorf during the IST 2001 event that was held on 3, 4 and 5 December 2001.
