-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove Ad Publishing Policy document type #272
Comments
I agree with that, I can handle it.
Idem.
I'm not able to do it. Do you want @MattiSG to take care of it or should I ask @martinratinaud ?
Yes ! 👌 @AaronjSugarman being as the origin of the pull request #262, please read this discussion. Your opinion could be important and I would prefer to wait for your answer before going ahead. Thank you Matti for this feedback |
I agree that an "Ad Publisher Policy" is specific type of "Acceptable Use Policy", and thus can be replaced by "Acceptable Use Policy" to simplify things. My only concern and argument in favor of keeping "Ad Publisher Policy" is that it would make it easier to identify which of the Acceptable Use Policies cover ad publishing (i.e. the majority of documents I emailed asking Open Terms Archive to track from GDI). For example, due to my work I'm familiar with which Acceptable Use Policies concern ads by name alone, but I do not believe that to be the case for most audiences. I will ultimately leave it up to your discretion @clementbiron since you know more about the organization of the Open Terms Archive. I hope this feedback was helpful! |
Thank you @AaronjSugarman for your quick reply! I agree that it would be useful to add some categories to service providers, so that we know that the
No, I'm not familiar enough with that process, sorry 🙁 |
@martinratinaud could you please migrate the history of documents with the Full rewrite history documentation is here and there is a detailed explanation for document type renaming. |
Hi @MattiSG I've tried to rewrite the history but I guess that 1,000,000 commits may be very large to process and will lead to problems. So three options here
I believe 2. could be done to make sure there is definitely not an easy fix but I think we should more focus on getting funded and tackle the whole refactoring alltogether What do you think ? |
I believe you have a better understanding of the value of the accumulated history for these documents 🙂 I don't believe it is a big problem to leave these commits behind, it is just lost information. So I would be in support of another option: just migrate all document types, and abandon the history. |
I suggest to abandon the history, it seems to me simpler and will allow to start from better bases. @AaronjSugarma as you are the main person involved in the following of this type of document, does this seem like a feasible option to you ? |
@clementbiron Would this mean removing all documents that have been classified as an ad publishing policy? I believe that I re-added all the relevant GDI documents through the website link and classified them as Terms Of Service, so that should be fine! |
@AaronjSugarman It's mean that the history of the documents with the type It's better thant ever, what do you think ? |
@clementbiron I want to point out something Emanuele told me when I showed him this thread: |
Thanks @AaronjSugarman for this insight! I think at this stage, we are only talking about replacing the |
Following #984, this issue has been moved to OpenTermsArchive/terms-types#9 🙂 |
I don't believe
Ad Publishing Policy
is a proper type.It was added in #264, apparently to support adding Google's Adsense “acceptable use for publishers” (in #262), i.e. this document.
However, the triptych for
Ad Publishing Policy
is exactly the same as the one forAcceptable Use Policy
. These triptychs are exactly there to prevent duplication across similar names.If the service provider, in the case of Google Adsense as in #264, or Adroll in #269 , is a service whose aim is to provide ads, then the service provider stating in a document how its end users (ad buyers) are expected to have an acceptable and unacceptable usage of the service, is declaring its
Acceptable Use Policy
.I thus believe that:
Ad Publishing Policy
should be removed as a valid type (or redefined so that its triptych makes clear what is so specific to this new type). All services using them should be updated toAcceptable Use Policy
as long as they are ads publishers. A quick search did not make me suspect there would be other services using that document type.types.json
😉The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: