I think that's as good as we need for STIXv.1.2.1. It was always going to be a stop-gap, and I'm happy with the wording within that context. STIX v2.0 is where we will need to be more specific.
Cheers
Terry MacDonald | STIX, TAXII, CybOX Consultant
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this email do not represent the sentiment of any other party except my own. My views do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.
On 1 September 2015 at 04:56, Patrick Maroney <Pmaroney@specere.org> wrote:
re: What do you all think about spinning up a separate work product effort to look into the Profile representation and tooling issues?
[+1] You can put me down as a volunteer for the STIX Profiles WG.
Patrick Maroney
President
Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc.
Office: (856)983-0001
Cell: (609)841-5104
Email: pmaroney@specere.org
From: <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Sean Barnum
Date: Monday, August 31, 2015 at 2:33 PM
To: "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org"
Subject: [cti-stix] Conformance clauses for the STIX specification documents
What do you all think about spinning up a separate work product effort to look into the Profile representation and tooling issues?