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
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