[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [cti] Sanity checking on references to other objects
The concept of having an optional hash(es) for the SDOs referenced in a relationship would essentially tie the relationship to a specific version of an object because any change to an SDO would change the hash… How does that impact your
thinking? From: <cti@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Terry MacDonald <terry.macdonald@cosive.com> My understanding was that we decided in the referencing/versioning working group that references would apply to all versions of an object. Therefore we don't want to specify particular versions of an object when we are lining them with
references. We managed the possibility of the references data changing greatly by mandating that if the meaning of an object changes greatly then it has to be released under a different STIX id, so that the relationship should apply through all of
the versions of an object. As an aside, this fact show alleviate concerns that Bret has about the location object, as any major changes/revisions to a location object will have to be released as a new object with a new STIX ID. Cheers Terry MacDonald On 16/06/2017 02:14, "Taylor, Marlon" <Marlon.Taylor@hq.dhs.gov> wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]