Verify semantics of the CVR upload, and that CVR outcomes match the preliminary reported outcomes from Election Night Reporting and/or the summary report

[nealmcb]

In order for a county to verify that a CVR was properly uploaded, parsed and tabulated, and that it represents the same view of the election as the other exports of the system, more details on the tool's interpretation of the data should be shared after upload. This includes the number of CVRs, and, for each contest, the number of CVR cards with that contest on them, the contest winners, and the tightest margin of victory (the winner with the least votes minus the loser with the most votes). Providing initial sample sizes would also be helpful.

After #477, the response from /import-cvr-export after a cvr upload looks like this:

<Response [200]> /upload-file {
  "file_id": 53375,
  "county_id": 3,
  "filename": "arapahoe-regent-3-clear-CVR_Export.csv",
  "size": 10968,
  "timestamp": "2017-08-26T02:32:35.179Z",
  "hash_status": "VERIFIED",
  "status": "IMPORTED_AS_CVR_EXPORT"
}

Augmenting it to add just the CVR count would be a significant step to ensure that the right data was uploaded.

Additional steps to allow counties to ensure that the contest winners and margins match should also be taken, either within the tool's web user interface, or via a csv download of contest results, or via some out-of-band method with an appropriate user interface.

[dmzimmerman]

I believe this to be beyond the scope of the tool we were asked to deliver for phase 3.

[kiniry]

I think that the features @nealmcb summarizes are important, both for the usability of the tool for EOs and for elections integrity. But as @dmzimmerman mentions, none of this is mentioned in the requirements.