Original author: jim.but...@nexage.com (July 22, 2011 21:30:35)
Referring to the reference data for Content Categories (Section 6.1), the tier-1 IAB values have been changed from the OpenRTB Mobile specification unnecessarily. The 2.0 draft adds tier-2 codes which is great. However, in the OpenRTB Mobile specification, IAB-24 was “Uncategorized” which is noted in the IAB reference in sequence as the 24th tier-1 category and it has IAB-25 and IAB-26 as “Non-Standard Content” and “Illegal Content”, respectively. The 2.0 draft not only eliminates “Uncategorized”, but renumbers the latter two as IAB-24 and IAB-25.
The tier-2 codes under IAB-1 through IAB-23 are fine, but the aforementioned OpenRTB Mobile definitions of IAB-24, IAB-25, and IAB-26 should be restored to avoid a needless point of backward incompatibility.
Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/openrtb/issues/detail?id=34
Original author: jim.but...@nexage.com (July 22, 2011 21:30:35)
Referring to the reference data for Content Categories (Section 6.1), the tier-1 IAB values have been changed from the OpenRTB Mobile specification unnecessarily. The 2.0 draft adds tier-2 codes which is great. However, in the OpenRTB Mobile specification, IAB-24 was “Uncategorized” which is noted in the IAB reference in sequence as the 24th tier-1 category and it has IAB-25 and IAB-26 as “Non-Standard Content” and “Illegal Content”, respectively. The 2.0 draft not only eliminates “Uncategorized”, but renumbers the latter two as IAB-24 and IAB-25.
The tier-2 codes under IAB-1 through IAB-23 are fine, but the aforementioned OpenRTB Mobile definitions of IAB-24, IAB-25, and IAB-26 should be restored to avoid a needless point of backward incompatibility.
Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/openrtb/issues/detail?id=34