OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cti message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [cti] Suggested formatting for normative text

I am a fan of all literals having the same font, font color, background color.  

I am not a fan of mixing cases.  I would prefer that we do all lowercase.  I do not want some things in Camel Case and some in all lower case.  



Bret Jordan CISSP
Director of Security Architecture and Standards | Office of the CTO
Blue Coat Systems
PGP Fingerprint: 63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447  F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 0050
"Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that can not be unscrambled is an egg." 

On Feb 10, 2016, at 12:41, Piazza, Rich <rpiazza@mitre.org> wrote:

As we start writing normative text in Google docs we should agree about some basic rules for formatting and naming, so we don’t have to fix it later (coming from someone who had to do that to 15 STIX documents and 94 CybOX documents….). 
Here are is what we are currently doing for formatting:
·         Use Arial/11pt for basic text.
·         Use the provided header styles
·         Use Consolas/11pt  for JSON examples (color: RGB(199, 37, 78)) with background (color: RGB(249, 242, 244))
·         Property names in  bold
For naming, we haven’t been consistent… here is a list of proposed rules
·         Type names do not have the “Type” suffix
·         Type names are camel case
·         Property names are all lower case, using dashes, not underscores.
Should type names and property names be in a special font and/or color?   Currently it is the same as the JSON examples.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]