Typescript Library for Metaschema and OSCAL

[nikitawootten-nist]

User Story:

As an OSCAL tool developer, I want libraries I can use as part of my own tools that will assist me in (de)serializing and transforming objects from JSON/YAML/XML Metaschema/OSCAL objects using Metaschema definitions from within the Node/Javscript ecosystem.

Goals:

NOTE: This is a public issue tracker for the metaschema-node and oscal-node libraries which are currently being developed by the NIST team. Currently they have not been released.

Dependencies:

N/A

Acceptance Criteria

• All OSCAL website and readme documentation affected by the changes in this issue have been updated. Changes to the OSCAL website can be made in the docs/content directory of your branch.
• A Pull Request (PR) is submitted that fully addresses the goals of this User Story. This issue is referenced in the PR.
• The CI-CD build process runs without any reported errors on the PR. This can be confirmed by reviewing that all checks have passed in the PR.

[tuckerzp]

I just sent an email, but I attended the OSCAL Mini Workshop and was told to ask for access to TypeScript repository here. I would be interested to see the progress and help contribute.

[nikitawootten-nist]

I just sent an email, but I attended the OSCAL Mini Workshop and was told to ask for access to TypeScript repository here. I would be interested to see the progress and help contribute.

Good afternoon @tuckerzp. According to the project access page there's a pending invite for you from @iMichaela. Please let me know if you can see it, if not I can resend the invite.

[aj-stein-nist]

Hey @nikitawootten-nist I thought we got rid of tracker issues. Are we keeping this around to allow the public to sign up for the alpha? Let me know as I noticed this while reviewing the backlog.

[nikitawootten-nist]

Hey @nikitawootten-nist I thought we got rid of tracker issues. Are we keeping this around to allow the public to sign up for the alpha? Let me know as I noticed this while reviewing the backlog.

Do we still want to maintain the "closed alpha" status, or just build in the open with the explicit notice that the implementation is incomplete? We can avoid publishing on NPM to make this clear.

[aj-stein-nist]

Sorry if we have time today I will bring this up at the end of issue review (but I am not sure we will have time).

[aj-stein-nist]

As an epic predating #1688 board reorganization, I will want to label this as needs refinement for now until it can be broken down, rescoped, and or closed. Apologies, I miscategorized this one, @nikitawootten-nist I will try to sync up on this some time later this week, but we can take Further Analysis Needed to mean review the publication process and close out this tracker issue.