Incorporated additional README.md comments from reviewers (issue #642)

[DimitriZhurkin]

Committer Notes

Incorporated additional README.md comments from reviewers (issue #642).

All Submissions:

• Have you selected the correct base branch per Contributing guidance?
• Have you set "Allow edits and access to secrets by maintainers"?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?
• Have you squashed any non-relevant commits and commit messages? [instructions]
• Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
• If applicable, have all FedRAMP Documents Related to OSCAL Adoption affected by the changes in this issue have been updated.?
• If applicable, does this PR reference the issue it addresses and explain how it addresses the issue?

By submitting a pull request, you are agreeing to provide this contribution under the CC0 1.0 Universal public domain dedication.

[kyhu65867]

You can mark as resolved, I just saw that you already mentioned it :)

…

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 1:08 PM DimitriZhurkin ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In src/validations/constraints/README.md <#648 (comment)> : > @@ -31,7 +34,7 @@ To install OSCAL CLI 7. To create the **oscal-cli** directory, run the following command: Kylie, do you want to clarify this comment, or should I mark it as resolved? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#648 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BK2ISNFACVNOEZUCSKDQGGLZU4473AVCNFSM6AAAAABNNFHYZSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDEOBQHAYDGNJSGI> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[kyhu65867]

Perfect!!

…

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 1:29 PM DimitriZhurkin ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In src/validations/constraints/README.md <#648 (comment)> : > @@ -76,7 +81,7 @@ Cloning the FedRAMP Automation GitHub repository gives you access to the latest This is a perfect example, when what I wrote was not what I meant it to mean. :-) How about changing it to this: "To validate your FedRAMP OSCAL content, you need to clone the FedRAMP Automation GitHub repository, which contains FedRAMP-specific OSCAL extension tests." — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#648 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BK2ISNGIB22FWQBTDB2M4P3ZU47PTAVCNFSM6AAAAABNNFHYZSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDEOBQHA2TIMBUGY> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[kyhu65867]

Perfect!! Feel free to resolve :)

…

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 1:07 PM DimitriZhurkin ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. ------------------------------ In src/validations/constraints/README.md <#648 (comment)> : > * `--sarif-include-pass` is the option to include passed validation results in the SARIF report (by default, the SARIF output includes only failed validations; if you want only the failed results, omit this option) +For example, run the following command: +`$ oscal-cli validate ssp.xml -c fedramp-external-allowed-values.xml -o ssp-validation-results.sarif --sarif-include-pass` Yeah, since it's an example of the content directly preceding it, I don't think it's necessary. If you feel otherwise, reopen it. And just to clarify, my goal is not my writing *per se* (I can spend hours on a single sentence, tweaking it, but there's always room for improvement), but the end-users: How quickly and easily the end-users can perform their immediate tasks, using the documentation. Hence, every comment from you reviewers matters. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#648 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/BK2ISNDESS4UM5LOR67MXNTZU443FAVCNFSM6AAAAABNNFHYZSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDEOBQHAYDCMRZG4> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>