Let me know if that clarifies.1. Indicate whether a page is AMP or not (Site.amp in the proposal) -- which may be useful to DSPs who want to optimize or report on whether a page is AMP.2. Indicate any requirements or behavior around AMP ads (Imp.ampad in the proposal). Today, AMP ads are not required on AMP pages. In the future, some publishers may either choose to render AMP ads immediately and non-AMP ads with a delay, may require AMP ads only, or perhaps may not allow AMP ads.
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "openrtb-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/openrtb-dev/0wyPsF5D07Q/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to email@example.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
- If you think this flag is going to impact how the DSP selects creatives, shouldn't it be part of the "Banner Ad Types" list (section 5.2)? Or Protocols (section 5.8) - though that seems to be just for video at the moment? It feels to me like we're starting to see a bit of Frankenstein's monster syndrome with all of these different formats and media types added piecemeal, and it would be great to see this reunified - perhaps that's in 3.0.
- I personally would prefer simplicity to precision - as you mention on my comment in the document, it *could* impact DSP decision-making to know whether amp ads will get rendering precedence, but in practice I can only think of one case where a DSP would actually factor that in: if it had identical amp and non-amp alternatives for the same creative. But... if AMP ads don't get precedence, I can still safely return the AMP creative. So the flag doesn't really create meaningful value for the DSP. Omitting this detail makes it easier to move amp support into an existing list.
- Most important - how does the DSP indicate that the creative returned is in amp format? I think we need this so that the publisher/SSP can drop the necessary AMP framework JS as needed if it's not in an AMP page. Again, it would be great to overload something that exists already instead of adding new AMP-specific fields. It's possible that this is part of creative pre-registration, but I don't think all SSPs require that.
- Does it make sense to think about how to use the AMP analytics framework to allow the DSP to register for events that may not be in the creative? This is currently all sitting in VAST grossness in the video case, and jammed into creative HTML in the banner case. A content-aware version of OpenRTB could be very powerful.
On Friday, February 17, 2017 at 10:50:26 AM UTC-5, Haskell Garon wrote:Hi all,Here is a Google proposal for 2.6+ to indicate whether a page is AMP and the requirements for AMP ads in the request. We'll follow up later with a seperate proposal around returning AMP ads in the bid response.Due to sharing settings on our docs, I may need to approve comment access individually, so bear with me.Haskell