Re: [cti-stix] RE: Spec Version

["Jason Keirstead" <Jason.Keirstead@ca.ibm.com>]

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