[/assessment-plan/local-definitions[1]/objectives-and-methods[1]/part[2]/prop[1]/@name] Value 'method' doesn't match one of 'alt-identifier, label, marking, or sort-id' at path '/assessment-plan/local-definitions[1]/objectives-and-methods[1]/part[2]/prop[1]/@name'

[Telos-sa]

Validation error seems to conflict with cardinality rules for assessment-method. Located in Local Definitions.

What was validated

 "local-definitions":{
            "objectives-and-methods":[
               {
                            "name":"assessment-objective",
                            "ns":"http://csrc.nist.gov/ns/oscal",
                            "props": [
                                {
                                    "name": "method-id",
                                    "ns":"http://csrc.nist.gov/ns/oscal",
                                    "value":"Examine databases"
                                }
                            ]
                        },
                        {
                            "name":"assessment-method",
                            "ns":"http://csrc.nist.gov/ns/oscal",
                            "props":[
                                {
                                    **"name":"method",**
                                    "uuid":"df1c6b21-679c-57f0-b0e1-c6b6a4f05bad",
                                    "ns":"http://csrc.nist.gov/ns/oscal",
                                    "value":"EXAMINE"
                                }
                            ]
                        }
                    ]
                },

Cardinality rules from Model seems to indicate the structure is correct.

Can you please provide guidance in determining our error:

[Telos-sa]

When testing without the prop, get a cardinality issue. Cannot identify the structure discrepancy
sap_val.txt
sap_val2.txt
to determine how to proceed.

[iMichaela]

@Telos-sa - Thank you for pointing to this bug. I noticed it too and I raised it in the Data bites (FedRAMP) meeting so we fix it in a way that aligns with the community's expectations, FedRAMP in particular.

Do you mind moving the issue to the correct repo? Alternatively, I can move it, and close it here.

[Telos-sa]

@iMichaela If you could move it, that would be helpful, and drop us a line as to where we should place these. We are starting to ramp up on the FedRAMP validation pilot, so there will be elements coming through from all of the models.

Let me know what the best practice should be for this, so we can sort these issues appropriately.

[iMichaela]

@iMichaela If you could move it, that would be helpful, and drop us a line as to where we should place these. We are starting to ramp up on the FedRAMP validation pilot, so there will be elements coming through from all of the models.

Let me know what the best practice should be for this, so we can sort these issues appropriately.

Hi Lacy - those are all OSCAL schema issues and the OSCAL repo is the place for this kind of bugs. In this repo we only keep the artifacts in OSCAL. Wishing you and Telos team the best of luck with the pilot.