RE: [cti-stix] language tag text in Part 1

Hi, Jason,

> The majority of the time the language tag is going to be coming

> from somewhere outside of the control of the software,

> as it is usually coming from some other system.

I think our system does produce the language tags.

I thought you mentioned before that you need the language tags

to distinguish text in different languages.

Is your use case something like (A) STIX with the language tags

comes from some other system, or (B) some non-STIX data in

different languages comes from some other system?

Regards,

Ryu

From: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Jason Keirstead
Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2018 6:53 AM
To: Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>
Cc: cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cti-stix] language tag text in Part 1

The majority of the time the language tag is going to be coming from somewhere outside of the control of the software, as it is usually coming from some other system.

As such, as long as none of this is a MUST, I am somewhat dispassionate - however, keeping that in mind, even this text I think is a bit of a stretch.

I lean more towards not doing anything here and simply referencing the RFC as-is.

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

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

From: Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>
To: "cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org" <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: 09/04/2018 12:30 PM
Subject: [cti-stix] language tag text in Part 1
Sent by: <cti-stix@lists.oasis-open.org>

All,

In regards to the text around language codes in part 1, right now we just say the code needs to follow RFC 5646. I have recently reread that RFC to make sure we would be okay. As all things in RFC land, this RFC allows for several weird cases for language tags and several types that are just weird. While I think we would be okay with just stating that it has to be a compliant RFC 5646 tag, I believe it might be better if we added some basic profile text to help people understand what it should be like.

This text would NOT exclude people from doing everything in the RFC, but it might help people generate more sane representations. I would propose the following text, or something like it.

"The primary language subtag SHOULD use the 2 character alpha tag as defined in section 2.2.1 of RFC 5646 and ISO 639-1:2002 and MAY also include a region subtag as defined in section 2.2.4 of RFC 5646. The region subtag, if included, SHOULD use the 2 character alpha as defined in ISO 3166-1."

I am curious to hear what others think.

Bret

cti-stix message