Michaela Iorga

@JustKuzya indicated he is re-doing the solution he had in place in Dec.

### 02/09/2023 Update: Started working on this issue. Met with Armita and Ned to explain the process. I will address all OSCAL pages related issues in one PR (including the...

## 02/23/2023 I will submit a PR addressing this issue before Monday, 02/26/2023

> > If we were to add an implementation-status to a component in a component-definition, what would this status indicate? > > We are finding it useful for component authors...

Following the research done as part of the [DEFINE spiral 4]( https://github.com/usnistgov/OSCAL-DEFINE/issues/17), the issue will be (experimentally) addressed in the release candidate OSCAL 1.3.0 by allowing the declaration of the...

@brian-comply0 - NIST 800-53 catalog is most likely not reflecting OSCAL best catalog representation practices based on your descriptions above, but we need to also admit that 800-53 + 53A...

@brian-comply0 - All your points are valid. > The problem here is that the NIST OSCAL Team is trying to represent content owned by the NIST RMF Team, thus it...

Proposed plan of action for the team members to consider and provide feedback: 1) Declutter the pool of labels currently used. - important labels to have: - priority labels, -...

> I also think there are some things we have to think about to "tell the story" about topics of work, and that is where I am fundamentally concerned @aj-stein-nist...

> Would it be possible not to stress this question until we have actually moved a few Issues onto and then _off from_ the board? By showing what works we...