Document highestScoringOtherBid and madeHighestScoringOtherBid fields #316
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@caraitto I assume we want to change what we pass in as the highestScoringOtherBid and what we base madeHighestScoringOtherBid when calling reportWin() in component auctions? |
|
@caraitto Any thoughts on this? |
caraitto
approved these changes
Jun 27, 2022
| @@ -478,7 +481,11 @@ The arguments to this function are: | |||
|
|
|||
| * auctionSignals and perBuyerSignals: As in the call to `generateBid()` for the winning interest group. | |||
| * sellerSignals: The output of `reportResult()` above, giving the seller an opportunity to pass information to the buyer. In the case where the winning buyer won a component auction and then went on to win the top-level auction, this is the output of component auction's seller's `reportResult()` method. | |||
| * browserSignals: Similar to the argument to `reportResult()` above, though without the seller's desirability score, but with additional `interestGroupName` and `seller` fields. The `dataVersion` field will contain the `Data-Version` from the trusted bidding signals response headers if they were provided by the trusted bidding signals server response and the version was consistent for all keys requested by this interest group, otherwise the field will be absent. If the winning bid was from a component auction, then `seller` will be the seller in the component auction, a `topLevelSeller` field will contain the seller of the top level auction. Additional fields could also include some buyer-specific signal like the second-highest bid from that particular buyer. | |||
| * browserSignals: Similar to the argument to `reportResult()` above, though without the seller's desirability score, but with additional `interestGroupName`, `seller`, `madeHighestScoringOtherBid`, and, potentially, `topLevelSeller` fields. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should also mention highestScoringOtherBid in this list.
| @@ -478,7 +481,11 @@ The arguments to this function are: | |||
|
|
|||
| * auctionSignals and perBuyerSignals: As in the call to `generateBid()` for the winning interest group. | |||
| * sellerSignals: The output of `reportResult()` above, giving the seller an opportunity to pass information to the buyer. In the case where the winning buyer won a component auction and then went on to win the top-level auction, this is the output of component auction's seller's `reportResult()` method. | |||
| * browserSignals: Similar to the argument to `reportResult()` above, though without the seller's desirability score, but with additional `interestGroupName` and `seller` fields. The `dataVersion` field will contain the `Data-Version` from the trusted bidding signals response headers if they were provided by the trusted bidding signals server response and the version was consistent for all keys requested by this interest group, otherwise the field will be absent. If the winning bid was from a component auction, then `seller` will be the seller in the component auction, a `topLevelSeller` field will contain the seller of the top level auction. Additional fields could also include some buyer-specific signal like the second-highest bid from that particular buyer. | |||
| * browserSignals: Similar to the argument to `reportResult()` above, though without the seller's desirability score, but with additional `interestGroupName`, `seller`, `madeHighestScoringOtherBid`, and, potentially, `topLevelSeller` fields. | |||
| * The `madeHighestScoringOtherBid` field is true if the IG owner was also the only bidder that made bids with scores equal to the second highest scoring bid, at least one of which made a bid of `highestScoringOtherBid`. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe either refer to the mention the reportResult() version, or mention things like breaking of second-highest scoring ties, that this is 0 if there is no second-highest scoring bid, etc.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Note that this currently attempts to describe what these fields are now in Chrome's current FLEDGE implementation. I suspect we want to change the values passed to reportWin() to always reflect information for the top-level auction?