We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
The way we map @xsi:type to Python classes (and resolve classes for @xsi:type) is different between python-stix, python-cybox, and python-maec.
@xsi:type
We could probably factor out that code into a common module and modify existing code to register and resolve extensions via that module.
The may be related to CybOXProject/python-cybox#274 and could require a good amount of rethinking what XML metadata we attach to Entity classes.
Look at stix/__init__.py and stix/bindings/__init__.py as examples of what I did in python-stix (it could be done a lot better).
stix/__init__.py
stix/bindings/__init__.py
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
The way we map
@xsi:typeto Python classes (and resolve classes for@xsi:type) is different between python-stix, python-cybox, and python-maec.We could probably factor out that code into a common module and modify existing code to register and resolve extensions via that module.
The may be related to CybOXProject/python-cybox#274 and could require a good amount of rethinking what XML metadata we attach to Entity classes.
Look at
stix/__init__.pyandstix/bindings/__init__.pyas examples of what I did in python-stix (it could be done a lot better).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: