Grouping controls into major sections, such as x.y, may seem useful, but when using this structure it makes it difficult for basic users to reuse your profile in a wrapper or dependacny chain. Also it makes it less clear when including or depending on mutliple profiles profiles which controls you want from which profile. The simpliest thing would be to use the same naming structure for your file names in the controls and you did for your control id's.
For example, if we were looking at the azure-foundations-benchmark, the naming structure for the files and the control id's could be:
Grouping controls into major sections, such as x.y, may seem useful, but when using this structure it makes it difficult for basic users to reuse your profile in a wrapper or dependacny chain. Also it makes it less clear when including or depending on mutliple profiles profiles which controls you want from which profile. The simpliest thing would be to use the same naming structure for your file names in the controls and you did for your control id's.
For example, if we were looking at the azure-foundations-benchmark, the naming structure for the files and the control id's could be:
azure-cis-foundations.1.1...