Enhance KYC age verification documentation - #48
Conversation
Added notes explaining content lock and parental control.
CAMARA Validation — PASS (with warnings)0 errors, 22 warnings, 7 hints | Profile: standard |
| - `parentalControl`: Indicates if the subscription associated with the phone number has any kind of parental control activated. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Note | ||
| - `contentLock`: typically web content lock indicates that access to certain websites or online content by an end user is restricted by default to ensure safe browsing, unless the end user has proven to be over a minimum required age limit. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have checked internally, and in TEF case contentLock is a line feature, not attached to the age of the user.
Therefore, we prefer the initial formulation of this concept with a NOTE to explain the case for Operators that link this feature to a minimum age required.
For instance (suggested text):
contentLock: typically web content lock indicates that access to certain websites or online content by an end user is restricted by default to ensure safe browsing.- NOTE: It may happen that in some Markets/Telco Operators this feature is linked to the fact of the end user has proven to be over a minimum required age limit. That is, in case the end user has proven to be over a minimum required age limit
contentLockcan be disabled.
- NOTE: It may happen that in some Markets/Telco Operators this feature is linked to the fact of the end user has proven to be over a minimum required age limit. That is, in case the end user has proven to be over a minimum required age limit
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks @PedroDiez for your comment.
@ToshiWakayama-KDDI , WDYT ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, @GillesInnov35 , @PedroDiez .
LGTM, though I still don't quite understand why these two properties, which seem to be independent of age_check, are included in the Age Verification API. However, I understand that this was the approach agreed for our Spring25 release.
|
I think I can approve this PR now, however, @HuubAppelboom, is the latest note fine with you? |
@ToshiWakayama-KDDI the latest note is fine with me, we don't support content lock currently in the Netherlands |
ToshiWakayama-KDDI
left a comment
ToshiWakayama-KDDI
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you, @GillesInnov35 , @HuubAppelboom , @PedroDiez . LGTM.
4 participants
Added notes explaining content lock and parental control.
What type of PR is this?
Add one of the following kinds:
What this PR does / why we need it:
Improve on the definition of parentalControl and contentLock to explain the difference between the two have a more specific definition.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #28
Special notes for reviewers:
Don't hesitate to update fields definition