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

["Kirillov, Ivan A." <ikirillov@mitre.org>]

That doesn’t answer my question. You’re still not getting a true ontology - just various auto-generated schemas based on UML, which I have yet to see be proven as useful. My inclination that we really need to rebuild STIX/CybOX from the ground up in RDF/OWL, including on making sure that we have the right set of instances, datatype properties, object properties, etc. if we JSON-LD or another ontology-based exchange to be useful. Otherwise, I feel that JSON schema offers the best value in the interim and will help driven adoption. Again, we can always revisit the JSON-LD question when we are ready.

Regards,
Ivan




On 11/23/15, 4:32 PM, "Cory Casanave" <cory-c@modeldriven.com> wrote:

>Re: Given that, what is the value of JSON-LD in a UML-driven, XSD-derived representation?
>
>JSON-LD, JSON-Schema, RDF Schema and XML Schema can all be produced, in a consistent form, from a well-structured UML model.
>
>-Cory
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: cti-users@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:cti-users@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Kirillov, Ivan A.
>Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 2:50 PM
>To: Trey Darley; Shawn Riley
>Cc: cti-users@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: Re: [cti-users] Vote NO on JSON - Vote YES on JSON-LD and here is why...
>
>To add to Trey’s point below, JSON-LD would be a much more logical choice if STIX and CybOX had native ontological (RDF/OWL) representations. While this is likely a direction we’re heading in, it’s not where we are at today. Given that, what is the value of JSON-LD in a UML-driven, XSD-derived representation?
>
>Regards,
>Ivan
>
>
>
>
>On 11/23/15, 4:06 AM, "Trey Darley" <cti-users@lists.oasis-open.org on behalf of trey@soltra.com> wrote:
>
>>*Nor* is it the case that we are ruling out standardizing a JSON-LD CTI 
>>serialization schema *in future*. From the mail that went out
>>Friday:
>>
>><snip>
>>Likewise, the co-chairs recognize that there will be communities of 
>>interest requiring alternative serialization formats (XML, protobufs, 
>>JSON-LD, OWL, etc). The OASIS TC has a role to play in helping to 
>>standardize these alternative representations to ensure 
>>interoperabilitity. However, that work effort lies in the future.
>>First we must complete the task at hand.
>></snip>