Re: [EXT] Re: [cti-stix] GeoJSON

[Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>]

Lets do what we have now in the doc, and push the debate about GeoJSON to a future date.  

Bret

---

From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Trey Darley <trey@newcontext.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 6:25:00 AM
To: Struse, Richard J.
Cc: Wunder, John A.; cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [EXT] Re: [cti-stix] GeoJSON

 

On 28.06.2017 12:20:09, Struse, Richard J. wrote:
> To clarify, I think what would be deferred to a later date is
> re-evaluating whether or not GeoJSON support belongs in STIX at all.
> As written it sounded as if that was a foregone conclusion that was
> simply pushed to a later release. I don’t believe that to be the
> case.
>

Thanks for the clarification, Richard.

It was not my intent to suggest that GeoJSON would *definitely* be
added in a future release. Poor phraseology on my part, apologies for
the confusion.

--
Cheers,
Trey
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
Director of Standards Development, New Context
gpg fingerprint: 3918 9D7E 50F5 088F 823F  018A 831A 270A 6C4F C338
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
--
"It Has To Work." --RFC 1925