[Sirajmx]

Draft. Do not merge until the working group confirms the disposition of #23.

What this changes

A proposal can now say whether its line items may be bought separately (linked_execution, § 4.1), and a line item can say which other line items, or what spend on them, must be in the same commitment (requires, § 5.6.3). A bonus line item is a line item with requires and its own price, so every price stays self-contained. The § 2 "binding terms" hook now points at a real field. The Summary Representation carries has_requires and linked_execution, so screening agents don't recommend a line item that can't be bought on its own.

Related issue

Refs #23. Proposed to close OQ-5 (#6). The "same proposal and version" rule relies on the version rules proposed in #24.

Type

• Editorial — no normative effect
• Normative — changes what the spec requires
• Breaking — would break an implementation already built to this draft
• Examples / schema / docs only

Checklist

• The body section is updated
• Appendix A (field index) matches the body — two rows; scripts/check_appendix.py passes
• Appendix B (fields by marker, and the counts) matches the body — seller-set 29 → 31; 71 → 73 fields
• Any affected example in examples/ is updated and still parses — new line-item-ctv-bonus.yaml (§ 6.5); linked_execution: none in proposal.yaml
• RFC 2119 keywords used deliberately — MUST / SHOULD / MAY are not synonyms
• The no-inheritance rule (§ 2) still holds — requires references sibling ids; it inherits no values
• Anything selectable declares available[] and included[]; anything settable declares bounds (§ 3.1, § 3.2) — no new selectable or settable fields
• No confidential or commercially sensitive content

Knock-on effects

• Not included, for the working group: a hold rule, that when linked_execution is all a hold must use hold_scope: proposal, so a buyer can't hold the anchor line and let the rest of the package sell (TelevisaUnivision on [Change] § 2, § 4.1, § 5.6 — Line-item dependencies and bonus lines (linked_execution, requires) #23); an added_value flag, so a zero-cost bonus line isn't read as a pricing error (TelevisaUnivision on [Change] § 2, § 4.1, § 5.6 — Line-item dependencies and bonus lines (linked_execution, requires) #23); and total-proposal spend tiers (min_proposal_commitment).
• Example: [Change] § 2, § 4.1, § 5.6 — Line-item dependencies and bonus lines (linked_execution, requires) #23 suggested a CTV bonus unlocked by display and video spend. The examples have no video line item, so the bonus is unlocked by the display and CTV line items instead.
• Scope: this PR carries the change as filed in [Change] § 2, § 4.1, § 5.6 — Line-item dependencies and bonus lines (linked_execution, requires) #23. Points raised in the issue's comments are listed above for the working group, not added to the spec text.
• Related: [Comment] § 5.2 — Inventory composition #50 asks for indivisible OOH packages, which linked_execution: all covers.
• Appendix B: other open change requests also change these counts; whichever merges later recounts.

---

By opening this pull request I agree my contribution may be published under this
repository's licence, as set out in CONTRIBUTING.md.

[KonstantinMirin]

Postindustria (IAB Tech Lab member). @Sirajmx, two knock-ons for examples/line-item-ctv-bonus.yaml when other open PRs merge:

• Your App identity on properties PR (#17) makes domains or apps a MUST on each property, and the bonus line's weather-app property has neither. Under the no-inheritance rule (§ 2), it can't borrow from line-item-ctv.yaml, so it needs a copy of the apps[] entry that § 5.2 — App identity on properties (#15) #17 gives weather-app there.
• Our draft placement PR for #89 would make placement.plcmt REQUIRED for video, including video on ctv. The bonus line's only format is ctv/instream-15s, so it needs placement: { plcmt: 1 }, Instream (1).

CI only parses the examples, so neither break fails a check. Whichever PR merges later can carry each fix. If #70 merges first, we'll add placement to the bonus line in our PR.

Analyzed and generated with the help of Claude, fully reviewed by me.

[KonstantinMirin]

Postindustria (IAB Tech Lab member). @Sirajmx, four fixes to § 5.6.3 and its example:

• Drop the cycle bullet. The check runs on one commitment, so mutual all_of is met by buying both lines. It's the only way to make part of a proposal indivisible: a must-buy package with optional added-value lines (@bhillman-TelevisaUnivision on [Change] § 2, § 4.1, § 5.6 — Line-item dependencies and bonus lines (linked_execution, requires) #23).
• Drop any_of: []. "At least one" of an empty list is never true, so the bonus line fails a literal check. An absent key sets no condition.
• Sold out. With any_of: [A, B], A selling out blocks the line though B remains. Suggest: "non-committable when its requires can no longer be met by published line items."
• Example. PRIVATE_AUCTION lands in an OpenRTB 2.6 Deal, which prices only in CPM. Under our cost-method change request (#94), FLAT commits on spend, so max_impressions bounds nothing. A 0 CPM entry committed on units fits both.

Revised 2026-11-05: Our packages PR replaces requires with packages, so these points no longer apply.

Analyzed and generated with the help of Claude, fully reviewed by me.

[KonstantinMirin]

Postindustria (IAB Tech Lab member). @Sirajmx, thanks for dropping any_of: [] in 10a3780. Five of our coming PRs carry or change this PR's text:

• Shared types PR. It carries this PR at its head, renames min_commitment[] to min_commitments[], and writes mechanism terms in lower snake case, such as private_auction.
• Errors and extensions PR. It drops the cycle ban, as our earlier comment asked.
• Lifecycle PR. all is the only linked_execution value, and an absent value means the proposal is subsettable. The sold-out sentence applies only when "the line items left can't meet requires". We didn't use our posted "published line items" wording, because a referenced line item that is under_review would then block too.
• Handoff PR. The bonus line item sells as direct_io, with its FLAT 0 entry. This replaces our 0 CPM suggestion.
• Pricing PR. A min_commitments[] entry drops currency.

Once they're open, could you review them there?

Revised 2026-11-05: Our packages PR, stacked on these five, replaces requires and linked_execution with packages.

Analyzed and generated with the help of Claude, fully reviewed by me.

[KonstantinMirin]

Postindustria (IAB Tech Lab member). @Sirajmx, further work on #23 led us to our packages PR. It replaces requires and linked_execution, and our earlier suggestions here.

A line item should state facts about itself only. requires lets it name others, so their state reaches it. It can become non-committable when one it names sells out, its visibility follows theirs, and their cancellation invokes its cancellation_policy. If A requires B, and B requires C, A requires C unseen. BCN reports that such terms "would be hard to map into publisher order systems" (#103). linked_execution has one value, so it's a Boolean for the whole proposal only.

As @premesh (#93) and @clerongi (#50) suggest, the PR moves this one level up. A proposal holds line_items[] or packages[], and a package encloses the line items sold only together and the add-ons sold only with them. No line item names another.

If a sales term falls outside this, can you share an example?

Analyzed and generated with the help of Claude, fully reviewed by me.