The inconsistencies we talked about on last working call

[Bret Jordan <Bret_Jordan@symantec.com>]

All,

Here is the complete list of inconsistencies I found. The ones in red text we talked about on the last working call.

1. Malware Object - Name is optional, boolean is called is_family versus just "family"
1. We talked about name being optional and there is some good use cases for malware when you do not yet know a name, so optional really is key
2. Is_Family is weird.  We do not say "is_revoked" or "is_defanged".  We should probably just call this "family"
2. Indicator Object - Name is optional.
1. We talked about this and many people wanted it required, but we decided to keep it optional and add a normative SHOULD to say it should be filled out. 
3. Grouping Object - Name is optional
1. Is there a reason why you would not have a name for this?
4. Sighting Object - Does not have a description like the Relationship object.
1. Is there a reason why we would not want to have this?
5. Marking Definition - Name is optional, there is no description defined.  
1. We can not really make name required at this point, since the defined TLP markings do not have it. I guess we could, but it would require some text to explain why the TLPs did not have it, but it is NOW required. 
2. I am not sure why it does not have a description
6. Location Object - Does not have a name.
1. I am not sure why this is missing.  It seems like you would want or need the ability to call a location something.  "Joe's Internet Cafe".  Further, this should probably be required. 
7. SCOs - spec_version is optional
1. Are we going to have problems because some SCOs have changed from 2.0 to 2.1

Bret