The other thing(s) (which are all redundant labels for the OS SRG item)
are in fact derived from the CCI. The OS SRG is a selection of CCIs
relevant to operating systems, with their language adjusted to make
their applicability to operating systems more apparent. (Note that the
CCI list and the OS SRG are separate documents.)
(The redundant labels for an SRG item are a result of the implementation
of DISA's VMS, which seems peculiar in many ways.) I chose to use only
the CCI number (notated as "disa=") as I believe it to be a longer-term
identifier, and DISA's primary identifier.
You can think of the relationship between the different documents like
this, with each one becoming more class/product specific:
800-53 => CCI List => SRG => STIG
If we start tagging the CCI's as <ref disa..> I think it will get very
confusing. Objections to a patch naming them CCI instead of DISA? This
would allow a tag such as below which I think is cleaner.
<ref nist="CM-6 (1).1, CM-6" cci="000370" ossrg="00022">
I don't object to renaming "disa=" as "cci=". Such a renaming would
largely be for aesthetic purposes (though this conversation reveals that
there may be some value in comprehensibility/disambiguation). That
said, I do object to this particular tag since the "ossrg=" attribute is
redundant to what you are calling "cci". It provides no value so long
as there is a one-to-one function from OS SRG identifiers to CCIs.