inaccurate validation error message for "exhaust if multiple continuing" + overvoteLabel

[tarheel]

From NY:

Description:
The overvote rules determine how overvotes are handled during tabulation. When importing CSVs the default overvote label is b�overvoteb�. When the tabulator sees this it can respond by skipping to the next available rank, exhausting the CVR immediately, or exhausting if multiple continuing overvotes occur. When loading an ES&S CSV overvotes can also be reflected by displaying all candidates marked at that ranking, which is the only time b�Exhaust if multiple continueb� can be selected.

Expected Behavior:
When the Overvote Rule b�Exhaust if multiple continuingb� is selected the CSV must use the format displaying all candidates marked at that ranking. These candidates are required to be separate by a delimiter which will need to be included in the Overvote delimiter setting on the CVR Files tab. If these settings do not match, error messaging will state what configuration the user has either forgotten or filled out incorrectly.

Observed Behavior:
Error messaging around Overvote Rule: "Exhaust if multiple continuing" is selected displays in the console: "When overvoteLabel is supplied, overvoteRule must be either 'Always skip to next rank' or 'Exhaust if multiple continuing'!". However, the Overvote Label was not changed from its default. It is also understood that if the Overvote Label is changed the error message should include b�Exhaust immediatelyb� and not b�Exhaust if multiple continuingb�. "Exhaust if multiple continuing" requires the use of an Overvote Delimiter which cannot be used along side the Overvote Label.

Short-term: just document that the error message is inaccurate. It should read "When overvoteLabel is supplied, overvoteRule must be either 'Always skip to next rank' or 'Exhaust immediately'!"

Next release: fix the code. It just requires a one-line change to fix a mistake made during a refactor: the "When overvoteLabel is supplied, overvoteRule must be either X or Y" error message is incorrectly referencing OVERVOTE_RULE_EXHAUST_IF_MULTIPLE_TEXT when it should be using OVERVOTE_RULE_EXHAUST_IMMEDIATELY_TEXT.