OASIS Static Analysis Results Interchange Format (SARIF) TC

Committee Specification is available for your review

  • 1.  Committee Specification is available for your review

    Posted 07-08-2019 01:13
    I have applied the changes that arose during the comment period. All the comments were from the TC; there were no public comments. All the changes are bug fixes which we are making at editorial discretion; there are no substantive changes.   Please read the changes carefully. Our goal is to adopt this version as our Committee Specification at Wednesday’s TC meeting . (Actually the process is a bit subtle, but that’s the gist of it.)   There are four documents for your review:   Documents/CommitteeSpecifications/2.1.0/sarif-v2.1.0-committee-specification-change-barred.docx : This is the document showing the change bars from the document that we submitted for public comment. You just need to review the change bars. Documents/CommitteeSpecifications/2.1.0/sarif-v2.1.0-committee-specification.docx : This is the clean document, with all changes accepted, that we will send to OASIS as our proposed Committee Specification – assuming, or course, that we approve that course of action at this Wednesday’s TC meeting. You don’t really need to review this – I just wanted to you know what it was. Documents/CommitteeSpecifications/2.1.0/sarif-schema-2.1.0.json . You can review this by diffing it against the copy in Documents/CommitteeSpecificationDrafts/v2.1.0-CDS.1/. Documents/CommitteeSpecifications/2.1.0/sarif-external-property-file-schema-2.1.0.json . You can review this by diffing it against the copy in Documents/CommitteeSpecificationDrafts/v2.1.0-CDS.1/. The only difference is the change to draft-07.   The Documents/CommitteeSpecifications/2.1.0/ folder also includes HTML and PDF versions generated from the clean .docx file. Jim , I think I got the PDF right this time. Please check .   The changes are as follows. Please read the individual issues for details.   Changes to the schema:   Issue #420 : Missing "additionalProperties": false in schema, and missing object descriptions. Issue #421 : uri-reference format not supported in draft-04 Changes to the spec text: Issue #422 : Ensure all GUIDs in format examples are invalid. Issue #423 : Ballot comments from Yekaterina: typo and alphabetized roles Issue #425 : Fix mistake in originalUriBaseIds example Issue #426 : Fix broken links Issue #427 : §3.27.7: Fix obsolete mentions of "ruleDescriptorReference" Issue #429 : Add missing constraint: result.ruleId == result.rule.id   NOTE: The contents of this email will become the Editor’s Report that I present at this Wednesday’s TC meeting.   Thanks, Larry