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] i18n (RE: MVP Discussion)

Hi, Bret, all,


I know I am loud, but ...


By putting everything (text_id, language code) into the text itself like


     "title": {"text_id": "text-a1b2c3",

       en: "Dridex Campaign - Botnet 121"},


It does not affect other parts of the STIX and it does not get

affected changes in other parts of the STIX (like versioning

and object structure or how deep the object is).


As such, a single and simple code to produce and parse

the text will do.






From: Jordan, Bret [mailto:bret.jordan@bluecoat.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2016 8:23 AM
To: John-Mark Gurney
Cc: Masuoka, Ryusuke/
益岡 竜介; Jason Keirstead; cti@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cti] i18n (RE: MVP Discussion)


What I would like to know, yes I am partial to this design, is how this design will NOT work for people.  With some workflow analysis, and keeping with the identifier and versioning designs in STIX, I believe this, as represented by John-Mark, is the simplest and most straight forward solution.  


But if I am missing some really key point, please call it out.  


Personally I believe this design is straight forward enough and simple enough, that we could get this in the Summer 2016 release of STIX.  However, as I said, if it is missing some key thing, please let me know so I can better understand. 


This solution does the following:


1) Provides a solution for single producer, a UI in a product can easily allow translations to be created under the covers for an object. 


2) Provides a solution for third party translators.  


3) Allows translations to be sent separate from the original file.  


4) It does not require us to pre-identify every field that we want to translate and thus add UUIDs to all of the objects causing significant bloat on the wire and increased demands on processing.  


There are few elements that this design does not cover...


a) Mixing languages in the same JSON object.  This can be a good thing from a graph database standpoint and really simplifies the consumption of objects or request of the objects from a TAXII server.


b) It is not very clean for translating deeply nested objects.  I am sure we can figure out a solution for this, but the current example does not show one.  However, given our design criteria for STIX 2.x, we are desperately trying to flatten the objects as much as possible, so this may or may not end up being an issue.  









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 Apr 15, 2016, at 16:31, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@newcontext.com> wrote:


Masuoka, Ryusuke wrote this message on Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 02:20 +0000:

- Always give "text_id" and "lang" for every text field
 (So that anyone can give translations to the field later, knowing
 which language it is in.)

- Always give "text_ref", "text_id" and "lang" for every translation
 ("text_id" is for someone to provide translations to other than one in the original language.
 Example: A CTI text field created in Japanese, then it is given an English translation.
   Then German and French translations are produced based on the English translation.)

A big issue with this is that now EVERY text field (that is
translatable) will now have a UUID.  For descriptions, this isn't a
big issue, but when we are talking about titles and the like, it's
possible that the UUID will be longer than the translation itself..

I much prefer to handle translations by pointing to the object id,
and then the fields that you want to translate..

This is what I'm talking about:
 "type": "package",
 "campaigns": [
     "type": "campaign",
     "id": "campaign--a1201df6-c352-4a81-9c7c-5a6f896a4e31",
     "lang": "en",
     "revision": 1,
     "spec_version": "stix-2.0",
     "created_at": "2015-12-03T13:13Z",
     "created_by_ref": "identity--69a17e1b-bb45-4657-9a9d-96db3faccdde",
     "title": "Dridex Campaign - Botnet 121",
     "descriptions": "Dridex-based campaign leveraging Botnet 121",
     "intended_effects": [
       {"value": "theft-identity-theft"}
     "status": "Ongoing"
 "translations": [
     "obj_ref": "campaign--a1201df6-c352-4a81-9c7c-5a6f896a4e31",
     "type": "translation"
     "lang": "ja",
     "text_id: "text-a1b2c3-ja-1",
     "title": "Dridex
キャンペーン - ボットネット 121"
     "descriptions": "
ボットネット 121 を活用する Dridex を元にしたキャンペーン"
     "obj_ref": "campaign--a1201df6-c352-4a81-9c7c-5a6f896a4e31",
     "type": "translation"
     "lang": "de",
     "title": "Some German Title”
     "description": "Some German Description"

This is much more simple, It can be more simply handled in code by
overlaying objects by language preferences, etc...

As Bret pointed out, this does mean you can't have a base object w/
mixed languages, but I don't see a strong value in that, as those
other languages can be provided via translations...



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