Re: [cti] timestamp proposal for STIX 2.0 RC3

[Trey Darley <trey@kingfisherops.com>]

On 07.12.2016 15:20:30, Wunder, John A. wrote:
> 
> Personally, I think implementation guidance like both of those items
> should be in an implementer’s guide, separate from the
> specification, to keep the specification focused on STIX itself.
> 

I concur with your assessment, John. Adding a reference to the
relevant section of the (nascent) implementer's guide seems a
reasonable compromise solution.

-- 
Cheers,
Trey
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
Kingfisher Operations, sprl
gpg fingerprint: 85F3 5F54 4A2A B4CD 33C4  5B9B B30D DD6E 62C8 6C1D
++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++
--
"E pur si muove!" --Galileo Galilei

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature