Re: [cti-users] Vote NO on JSON - Vote YES on JSON-LD and here is why...

[Shawn Riley <shawn.p.riley@gmail.com>]

Hi Trey,

I respectfully request you consider Richard Struse's suggestion, "I would like to suggest that we all take a deep breath and give them the chance to make their argument with specific, concrete examples.  In the meantime, there is a ballot open that does not preclude model-driven approaches if the TC wants them."

I believe we also have the support of the Enhanced Shared Situational Awareness (ESSA) lead so please give us the time to make our argument and present our specific, concrete examples to the community. 

If you aren't familiar with the ESSA, you can read about it here: https://www.us-cert.gov/essa

Thanks again for your willingness to collaborate and give us the time to make our argument.

Shawn

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:40 AM, Trey Darley <trey@soltra.com> wrote:

On 24.11.2015 07:51:40, Trey Darley wrote:
> On 23.11.2015 22:10:36, Wunder, John A. wrote:
> >
> > I know I would change my vote if it truly gets to the point where
> > support JSON-LD is only a bit more work.
> >
>
> As would I. I have long supported the notion of semantic
> representation. But now is the time for pragmatism and progress on the
> refactoring effort.
>

Before anyone misconstrues my words, let me be clear. My vote on the
resolution at hand has been cast and I am *not* changing it. But the
measure is a non-binding vote. If, by the time we're nearing
completion of the ongoing refactoring effort, the JSON-LD crowd can
present us with a viable strawman, demonstrate in terms that the
*entire community* can *clearly understand* the value that a semantic
representation adds, *and* show that this added value can be achieved
without imposing a significant burden on implementers who are used to
JSON/JSON Schema, then I would be open to reconsidering the MTI
question.

Convincing the wider community is going to require a good deal more
work on the part of the JSON-LD folks than merely reposting the same
Slideshare links over and over again.

Meanwhile, we have been dickering around far too long. We're settling
this question today so we can move forward with more pressing matters.
Let us not allow idealistic visions of perfection to consign all our
hard efforts to obscurity.

--
Cheers,
Trey
--
Trey Darley
Senior Security Engineer
4DAA 0A88 34BC 27C9 FD2B  A97E D3C6 5C74 0FB7 E430
Soltra | An FS-ISAC & DTCC Company
www.soltra.com
--

"It is always something." --RFC 1925