Re: Update from STIX Package renaming Mini-Group

Disclaimer: This is my own personal opinion, in no way representative of any professional connections or organizations I'm involved with.

Hmm...There's something odd about "STIX-Bundle". I'm not sure I can say what, exactly.

I wonder if any of these synonyms to "bundle" would work? http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/bundle

Here are some alternatives I find appealing:

STIX-Assortment (evokes a box of chocolates)

STIX-Box (evokes the "toss everything in" use case)

STIX-Pile (evokes Autumn and kids jumping in the leaves)

The funny thing is that this synonym seems to make the most sense, because of the whole "shipping things around" analogy:

STIX-Package

Happy Friday, everyone!

JSA

PS-If we could expand our search, we could use words that evoke "tying together for transport". Like "STIX-ZipTie" or "STIX-Rope". Then again, there's something musical about "STIX-Band". Come sail away, come sail away...

PPS-Thanks for reading. Sometimes a little humor can help lighten things up. I hope this has.

Bundle Synonyms, Bundle Antonyms | Thesaurus.com

www.thesaurus.com

Synonyms for bundle at Thesaurus.com with free online thesaurus, antonyms, and definitions. Dictionary and Word of the Day.

All,

Here is a quick update from the STIX Package name mini-group. The mini group is proposing:

Renaming STIX-Package to STIX-Bundle
STIX-bundle is simply a transport container
STIX-Bundle is a grouping of STIX content that isn’t required to be related (it MIGHT be related, but being in the same bundle doesn’t mean it’s related)
Removing all TLO Common Properties (with an open question about Data Markings)
- Removed properties: id, created_by_ref, created_time, revision, modified_time, revoked, revision_comment, confidence, object_markings_refs, granular_markings
STIX-Bundle will keep the `spec_version` property
All content in the bundle MUST be the same STIX version (identified by spec_version)

There is an open question about whether Data Markings should be in the STIX-Bundle. Arguments for keeping it are:

The group seemed to have consensus that Bundle-level markings were desired, but evidence was difficult for the mini-group to find.
Certain sharing communities would appreciate the simplicity of package marking.
It makes objects look smaller and is more natural for people who are new to the specs

Arguments for removing it are:

Data Marking at the bundle level is “two ways of doing things” - on-the-object markings and on-the-bundle markings
TLO signatures will not be valid when the Bundle-level markings are used

Thank you.

-Mark

cti message