Repository navigation
[Comment] § 2, § 4, § 5 — Rules we left out of our PRs: should any be normative? #153
Description
Which section?
Whole document / more than one section
Field(s) involved
assent[], hold, pricing[], delivery_type, exclusions
Your comment
Postindustria (IAB Tech Lab member). Our PRs leave out 86 rules that would block or oblige a party. None is in our PRs' text, and no implementer has shown them.
Should any be normative? By group:
- Offer, issue, and reads (our lifecycle PR): must a seller issue a proposal while a firm entry holds, and hide every trace of an unreadable line item?
- Identity and eligibility (our parties PR): must a seller check the sender's authority before acting on a
commit? - Commit and assent (our signing PR): beyond a firm entry, must a seller answer a
commitmentwithin a set time? - Holds (our holds PR): must a hold request carry
requested_terms? - Pricing and money (our pricing PR): one currency per line item, a sign rule for other amounts, and a duty to grant
min_rate? - Cancellation (our pricing PR): does a cancel cascade to dependent line items, and what happens to flat charges?
- Handoff and creative (our handoff PR): must deals be
CPM, mustseatsbe present, and who records downstream ids? - Delivery and settlement (our settlement PR): what does the buyer owe under each
delivery_type, and who measures by default? - Video, audio, and embedded (our video and audio PR): must an ad recorded into the content say
serving_mode: embedded? - Audience and lists (our audience PR): must a seller reject an oversized list, and what does
pre_servepromise? - Forward compatibility and security (our errors and extensions PR): must fetches use
httpsand refuse internal addresses?
Rules left out of our PRs gives each rule's question, its options, and who it binds. It also lists rules the text already settles.
Tell us which rules you need, and why, and we'll open a PR. A rule nobody needs stays out.
Concrete scenario
A seller keeps a firm price but raises the option prices beside it. The buyer pays more for the same composition, and no rule stops it.
You are commenting as
Other — IAB Tech Lab member (Postindustria).
Before you submit
- I have read CONTRIBUTING.md and agree my contribution may be published under this repository's licence.
- This comment contains no confidential or commercially sensitive information.
Revised 2026-11-05: Four rules @EvgenyAndroid asked for moved into our PRs.
Analyzed and generated with the help of Claude, fully reviewed by me.
Activity
EvgenyAndroid commentedon Nov 5, 2026
Two of these I need, from implementation:
committhat arrives beforeprice_valid_untilshould get an answer before that date passes: accept, ordeclinewith a statedground, limited to the grounds stated when the firm rate was offered ([Change] § 4, § 5.1 — Add § 4.3 Lifecycle: who moves each status #65). Without it, silence works as a decline on no ground.commitment.advertisers[]should be REQUIRED on acommit. My implementation had to take the advertiser from the request's authenticated context and refuse when it was missing ([Impl] No field identifies the advertiser or brand a commitment is for #126), because nothing else in the record says whom the spend is for. Left OPTIONAL, every seller makes that call alone, and a commitment can bind a buyer agency with no named advertiser.Holds I've answered on #143.
KonstantinMirin commentedon Nov 5, 2026
Thanks, @EvgenyAndroid. As this issue offers, these went into PRs, so you can review them there:
commitment.advertisers[]is REQUIRED, adeclinestates itsground, and a seller answers acommitunder a firm entry while the entry holds, so silence can't work as a decline. The limit to stated grounds was already there.commit.The rules list marks them settled. The rest stay open here.
Analyzed and generated with the help of Claude, fully reviewed by me.