Attribute Name References: Need to do a full review of text descriptions
especially where attribute names are referenced. Some of these refer to names
that subsequently have been changed.
Object Descriptions Unclear: Some of the object description paragraphs are
rather unclear. For example, it took me awhile to figure out if the video
object was implying that “I want a video ad and these parameters describe
what I want” versus “I am video content, these parameters describe me, and
I want a video ad to be stitched into me”. The Data object is another
example where a couple clarifying examples would help.
Segment Object Value Description: The description of segment.value should
probably be clarified. While this is data that may have originated by a third
party, it is still essentially data that the exchange is presenting to all
bidders on a given auction. Therefore when the description talks about a
negotiation, that would be between the third party and the exchange (i.e., and
not any one bidder). The exchange must then make clear to the bidders what
this data represents and how it will be represented. I suggest expressing the
latter point as a “Best Practice” point similar to the first such point
under Device object (i.e., that the exchange is highly encouraged to publish
lists of device makes, models, etc., since there are currently no standardized
reference lists).
Connection Type Description: The table description in section 6.11 was copied
from 6.10, but never edited for the 6.11 table.
Bid Response Description: The first paragraph of 4.3.1 describing the bid
response was copied from 3.3.1 the bid request, but never edited.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by jim.butler%nexage.com@gtempaccount.com on 22 Jul 2011 at 9:58
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
jim.butler%nexage.com@gtempaccount.comon 22 Jul 2011 at 9:58