OQ-5 — Is a min_line_items field needed? #6

Activity

1. Sirajmx

   added

   open-questionRelates to one of the 7 open questions in § 8Relates to one of the 7 open questions in § 8

   section:2-object-shape

   section:4-proposal

   on Sep 24, 2026
2. Sirajmx commented on Oct 8, 2026

   

   Sirajmx

   on Oct 8, 2026

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   Change request #23 proposes linked_execution on the proposal and requires on line items. linked_execution: all would cover the all-or-nothing case this question asks about, and requires would cover bundles that are partly linked.

   We propose that this open question be dispositioned together with #23 at adjudication. It remains open until then, and comments are welcome on either issue.
3. premesh commented on Oct 27, 2026

   

   premesh

   on Oct 27, 2026

   More actions

   Evidence from OOH: yes, sellers sell bundles that have to be bought whole, and they're common. Examples, anonymised:

   • Full-line transit: every car on a train line or every bus on a route, sold as one buy. A buyer can't take half the cars.
   • Market showings: a set of units sized to reach a share of a market's population. Dropping units breaks what the showing is.
   • Station dominations: all the static and digital faces in one station, sold together for exclusivity (see [Change] § 5.9, § 5.6, § 2.1 — Add delivery_type: guaranteed, share_of_voice, non_guaranteed #93 OQ7 and [Change] § 5.6 — Give cancellation_policy and exclusivity options a typed shape #98).

   A count alone doesn't capture these, because the bundle is a specific set, not "at least N". So I'd back #23's linked_execution: all over a bare min_line_items, with requires for partly linked cases. A domination with optional add-on units is the case requires handles.
4. KonstantinMirin commented on Nov 5, 2026

   

   KonstantinMirin

   on Nov 5, 2026

   More actions

   Thanks, @premesh, for the OOH evidence. Our packages PR answers this question with a specific set, not a count, as you suggest. A package encloses the line items sold only together, such as a full line, a showing, or a station domination, and the add-ons sold only with it. requires and linked_execution go.

   One gap stays open, as § 8 question 5: what cancelling one line item of an agreed package does to the rest.

   Analyzed and generated with the help of Claude, fully reviewed by me.
5. premesh commented on Nov 7, 2026

   

   premesh

   on Nov 7, 2026

   More actions

   @KonstantinMirin on the open question of cancelling one line item of an agreed package, from the OOH side: a package sold whole is usually cancelled whole. Cancelling one line item of a domination or a full line breaks what was sold, so the seller either cancels the package under the package's cancellation terms or agrees a substitution. When part of a package can't deliver (a screen outage, say), the normal remedy is a makegood on that part, not a cancellation. I'd make partial cancellation of an agreed package a change request the seller must accept, not a buyer right.
6. KonstantinMirin commented on Nov 7, 2026

   

   KonstantinMirin

   on Nov 7, 2026

   More actions

   Thanks, @premesh. Our packages PR now follows that in § 4.1.4. A buyer cancels the line items of an agreed package only together. One request cancels the same share of each from the same requested date, where each line item's cancellation_policy allows it. A notice on only some of them exercises no option. It is a change request (§ 4.4) the seller MAY decline, unless terms_refs[] gives that change. The PR adds no package-level cancellation terms, and an add-on keeps its own cancellation_policy.

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