OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cti-stix message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [cti-stix] RE: Spec Version


Just to be clear, the breaking change has already been made. As Bret pointed out, we have actually removed the “spec_version” field from bundle for STIX 2.1. There would be no conflict now if we chose to call it “stix_version”.

 

That being said, I’m ambivalent. It doesn’t matter to me one way or the other. As such, I think it’s probably easier to just keep it the same (aka call it “spec_version”).

 

 

 

Sarah Kelley

Lead Cybersecurity Engineer, T8B2

Defensive Operations

The MITRE Corporation

703-983-6242

skelley@mitre.org

cid:image006.png@01D0A90C.2B5B2680

 

From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Jason Keirstead
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 9:14 AM
To: Katz, Gary <gary.katz.ctr@dc3.mil>
Cc: Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>; cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cti-stix] RE: Spec Version

 

The problem I have with this is, if we make this change, then either

- We make the same change to the bundle object, which is then a breaking change

- We don't make the same change to the bundle object, and now we have two fields with different names communicating the same thing

This to me is an arbitrary reason to make a breaking change. There are *a lot* of field names in STIX that are not going to make sense to a non-english speaker.

-
Jason Keirstead
Lead Architect - IBM Security Cloud
www.ibm.com/security

"Things may come to those who wait, but only the things left by those who hustle." - Unknown




From:        "Katz, Gary CTR DC3/TSD" <Gary.Katz.ctr@dc3.mil>
To:        Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>, "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date:        06/29/2018 10:01 AM
Subject:        [cti-stix] RE: Spec Version
Sent by:        <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org>





Like the idea, agree that stix_version would be clearer.
-G
 
From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Bret Jordan
Sent:
Thursday, June 28, 2018 4:47 PM
To:
cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject:
[Non-DoD Source] [cti-stix] Spec Version

 
All,
 
For STIX 2.1 the TC decided to add a "spec_version" property to all objects (a property that will record the version of STIX to which the object conforms). I wonder if this property would be best renamed to "stix_version" instead of "spec_version".  I feel like "stix_version" might make it more clear what we are referring to, especially for non-native english speakers.
 
In STIX 2.0 we had "spec_version" on the Bundle, however, that has been removed from the Bundle in STIX 2.1.
 
I originally brought this up on slack, but wanted to make sure the broader TC could voice their opinion, especially those that do not natively speak english.
 
Bret  
 



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]