Re: [cti] STIX Subcommittee Nomination

[Tony Rutkowski <tony@yaanatech.com>]

CybOX has many significant bases for an independent
existence.  It is already regarded as a STIX plug-in - as
are many other potential structured expressions.  It's
elegance and utility, however, goes far beyond STIX.
It should not be merged into a STIX subcommittee.

Last but not least, Phase I of the charter treats CybOX
as in independent platform.

--tony

On 2015-06-18 3:35 PM, Trey Darley wrote:

I move to create two technical subcommittees: representation and transport. I would like to see CybOX merged into STIX. To me it makes absolutely no sense maintaining them as separate standards. If we begin with separate STIX and CybOX committees, the raison d'etre of the CybOX committee is likely to become the maintenance of its own existence, human politics being what it is. (Pun intended.)

We can always decide to keep STIX and CybOX separate and spin up dedicated subcommittees but I would like to see us start with one single representation subcommittee tasked with deciding whether merging the two taxonomies into one makes sense.

C

--

________________________________

Anthony Michael Rutkowski

EVP, Industry Standards & Regulatory Affairs

tony@yaanatech.com

+1 703 999 8270

________________________________

Yaana Technologies LLC

542 Gibraltar Drive

Milpitas CA 95035 USA