Ad Tech Desperately Needs Data Exchange Standards(广告技术急需数据交换标准)

“Data-Driven Thinking" is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media.
“数据驱动思维”是由媒体界人士撰写的，包含有关媒体数字革命的新观念。

Today’s column is written by Sanjay Agarwal, vice president of engineering at Drawbridge.
今天的专栏由Drawbridge技术副总裁Sanjay Agarwal撰写

In the ad tech ecosystem before OpenRTB, proprietary protocols caused long integration cycles, more code complexity and maintenance and custom logic for parsing requests.
在OpenRTB之前的广告技术生态中，专有(译者注：定制)协议导致了冗长的集成周期，代码复杂性和维护以及自定义逻辑进行请求解析的难度。

The OpenRTB protocol replaced all proprietary protocols for sending ad requests from supply-side platforms (SSPs) to demand-side platforms (DSPs), resulting in faster integrations and a scaled ecosystem as a whole.
OpenRTB协议取代了所有专有协议，用于将供应方平台（SSP）的广告请求发送到需求方平台（DSP），从而实现可以更快的集成和规模化的生态系统。

While this solved the SSP-DSP interaction almost a decade ago, there is still unfortunately no standard format for exchanging data between data management platforms (DMPs) and DSPs, posing a major point of friction in connections between DMPs and DSPs. There is a strong need for the standardization of data formats and the transport layer to push data from a DMP to a DSP.
尽管解决了这十年SSP-DSP交互问题，但是不幸的是，在数据管理平台（DMP）和DSP之间进行数据交换时还没有标准的格式，这是DMP和DSP之间对接的严重摩擦点。现在迫切需要标准化数据格式和传输层，使得数据能够从DMP传输到DSP。

While this problem has been around for a decade or so now, the proliferation of data providers has made standardization all the more pressing. While the DMPs and DSPs certainly stand to benefit from standardization, the real winners at the end of the day would be marketers. They would be able to more seamlessly leverage first- and third-party data, get campaigns set up quicker, more easily receive data back and never have to worry about integration timelines.
虽然这个问题已经存在了十年左右，但是数据提供者的激增使得标准化更加紧迫。虽然DMP和DSP肯定会受益于标准化，但最终的真正赢家将是营销人员。他们将能够更无缝地利用第一方和第三方数据，更快地设置活动，更容易地接收数据，而不用担心对接所需要的时间。

Today, the typical timeframe for adding a new integration from DMP to a DSP is anywhere from two to four months. The “standard” options for the transport layer can be via the file transfer protocol, S3 bucket or HTTP, and the data format itself can be proprietary. Product and engineering teams from both sides are involved in the integration, with calls, email threads and a lot of back-and-forth that could easily be avoided with a standardized data format.
今天，DMP与DSP的对接典型的耗时范围是两到四个月。传输层的“标准”选项可以通过文件传输协议，S3 bucket或HTTP，数据格式本身可能是专有（定制）的。来自双方的产品和工程团队参与到对接，通过电话，电子邮件和大量的前后备案，这些都可以通过标准化的数据格式轻松避免。

The friction of sending and receiving data has resulted in niche DMPs using bigger DMPs like BlueKai to channel the data to media platforms. But usually this third-party onboarding results in a loss of functionality and scale, with a drop-off occurring at every data hop. Some companies also act as intermediaries to funnel the data from data producers to data consumers, which again results in loss of scale because of cookie translation. Data debugging becomes harder when third parties are involved, but unfortunately, due to today’s landscape, it’s required.
发送和接收数据的摩擦导致了使用更大的DMP（如BlueKai）的利基DMP将数据引导到媒体平台上。但通常这种第三方onboarding会导致每次数据传输数据功能和规模的损失。一些公司作为中介会导致数据流失，从数据生产者变成数据消费者 ，由于cookie映射，这些数据规模再次损失。当涉及第三方时，数据调试变得更加困难，但不幸的是，由于今天的现状，必需得这么做。

Offline transfer of data, such as through S3 or the file transfer protocol, results in less robust data validation. There is no feedback given to the sender on whether the data is received and processed correctly. Plus, if the data is time sensitive, such as first-party data used for retargeting, offline transfer will usually cause further delays, rendering the data useless.
数据的离线传输，例如通过S3或文件传输协议，导致无法进行可靠的数据验证。发送者对数据是否被正确接收和处理，不能得到任何反馈。另外，如果数据是时间敏感的，例如用于重定向的第一方数据，离线传输通常会导致进一步的延迟，使数据无用。

Data formats are fragmented. Typically, audience data is organized by storing segment IDs by cookies, device IDs or email hashes. Whatever data format is chosen, it should support both adding and removing segment IDs to cookies or device IDs.
数据格式分散。通常情况下，受众群体数据通过Cookie，设备ID或电子邮件散列存储分段ID来组织。无论选择什么数据格式，它都应该支持添和将字段ID映射到cookie或设备ID。

Another ideal feature would be bulk updates, where multiple user IDs can be modified, and each modification could even be accompanied by an expiration date until which the segment is valid. This could also support consumer choice and respect privacy through a standard opt-out that resonates across all IDs associated to the consumer. I could go on.
另一个理想的功能是大量更新，其中可以修改多个用户ID，每个修改甚至可以伴随有效的到期日期。这也可以通过标准的可选设置（与消费者相关的所有ID产生关联 ）来支持消费者的选择和尊重隐私。我会继续（探索）

Having a standard format to send data across would drastically cut down the time taken for integration between DMPs and DSPs, resulting in a more seamless exchange of data. Plus, new integrations could be turned on with a flip of a switch, and a real-time transport layer could support time-sensitive data.
拥有标准格式发送数据将大大减少DMP和DSP之间的对接所需的时间，从而实现更为无缝的数据交换。此外，新的对接可以通过一个交换机打开，实时传输层可以支持时间敏感的数据（交换）。

Just like OpenRTB has resulted in seamless integrations between SSPs and DSPs, the time is ripe to have a standard data format and transfer process for exchanging audience data between DMPs and DSPs. This will result in more platforms participating in the ecosystem, faster integrations and, ultimately, greater efficiencies for marketers.
就像OpenRTB在SSP和DSP之间实现无缝集成一样，现在已经是时候建立标准的数据格式和传输过程，以便在DMP和DSP之间交换受众数据。这将导致更多的平台参与生态系统，更快的整合，最终提高营销人员的效率。

The question is, who will lead the charge?
问题是谁负责？

翻译来源：
Ad Tech Desperately Needs Data Exchange Standards

译文地址：
adBlockchain区块链广告资讯