{"id":11608,"date":"2026-04-02T04:23:13","date_gmt":"2026-04-02T04:23:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/privacy-naming-convention\/"},"modified":"2026-04-02T04:23:13","modified_gmt":"2026-04-02T04:23:13","slug":"privacy-naming-convention","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/privacy-naming-convention\/","title":{"rendered":"Privacy Naming Convention: What It Is, Key Features, Benefits, Use Cases, and How It Fits in Privacy & Consent"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is a structured, documented way to name privacy-related items across your marketing and data stack\u2014so everyone (humans and systems) can understand what data is collected, why it\u2019s collected, and under which consent conditions it may be used. In Privacy & Consent<\/strong>, naming isn\u2019t cosmetic; it\u2019s operational. When your consent categories, tracking events, cookies, tags, and data purposes are consistently named, you reduce compliance risk, improve measurement quality, and make audits far less painful.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Modern Privacy & Consent<\/strong> strategy depends on fast-moving marketing execution\u2014new pixels, new partners, new campaigns\u2014while expectations around transparency and user choice keep rising. A well-designed Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> becomes the \u201cshared language\u201d that keeps legal, marketing, analytics, and engineering aligned without slowing growth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What Is Privacy Naming Convention?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is a standardized set of rules for naming and labeling privacy-relevant objects, such as:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • consent purposes and categories (for example, \u201canalytics\u201d, \u201cadvertising\u201d, \u201cfunctional\u201d)<\/li>\n
  • cookies and storage keys<\/li>\n
  • tracking tags and pixels<\/li>\n
  • analytics events and parameters<\/li>\n
  • data elements and fields in a CDP\/CRM\/warehouse<\/li>\n
  • processing activities in privacy documentation<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    The core concept is simple: names carry meaning<\/strong>. In a privacy context, names should reveal what something does, which systems use it, and what consent (or legal basis) is required. The business meaning is even more important: a strong Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> helps you answer questions like \u201cAre we firing advertising tags before consent?\u201d or \u201cWhich events are safe to use for personalization?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Within Privacy & Consent<\/strong>, this convention sits at the intersection of governance and execution. It is part taxonomy, part documentation, and part engineering discipline\u2014turning privacy requirements into practical, repeatable implementation patterns. Inside Privacy & Consent<\/strong>, it also supports faster troubleshooting, clearer user disclosures, and more trustworthy reporting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Why Privacy Naming Convention Matters in Privacy & Consent<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    In Privacy & Consent<\/strong>, you rarely fail because you lacked a policy document. You fail because the policy wasn\u2019t translated into day-to-day naming, tagging, and measurement decisions. A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> matters because it creates clarity where ambiguity is expensive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Strategically, it helps you:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    • Align teams<\/strong>: Marketing might say \u201cretargeting pixel,\u201d engineering says \u201cthird-party script,\u201d legal says \u201cadvertising processing.\u201d A shared naming structure reduces misinterpretation.<\/li>\n
    • Control data use<\/strong>: Clear labels make it easier to enforce consent gating and prevent data from flowing into the wrong destinations.<\/li>\n
    • Scale safely<\/strong>: As new markets, products, and channels are added, consistent naming prevents a patchwork of one-off rules.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

      From a business value perspective, a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> can improve marketing outcomes by reducing data loss from misconfigured consent modes, preventing broken reporting, and enabling cleaner attribution within what is permissible. It can also create competitive advantage: brands that can prove responsible data use often move faster with partners and face fewer operational disruptions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      How Privacy Naming Convention Works<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

      A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is both a design artifact and a daily workflow. In practice, it \u201cworks\u201d when it\u2019s embedded into how things get built and reviewed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      1. \n

        Input \/ Trigger<\/strong>\n A new campaign launches, a new vendor is added, a new event is defined, a new cookie appears, or a new consent category is introduced in your Privacy & Consent<\/strong> program.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      2. \n

        Analysis \/ Processing<\/strong>\n Teams classify the item: What is it? What purpose does it serve? Is it first-party or third-party? Which region does it apply to? Which consent state is required? The Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> provides the allowed vocabulary and the required attributes.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      3. \n

        Execution \/ Application<\/strong>\n The agreed naming rules are applied to the actual implementation\u2014tag manager variables, event names, cookie names, data-layer keys, and documentation entries. Validation checks (manual review or automated linting) ensure compliance with the convention.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      4. \n

        Output \/ Outcome<\/strong>\n You get consistent naming across systems, clearer user-facing disclosures, more reliable consent gating, and auditable records that connect implementation to policy\u2014core outcomes in Privacy & Consent<\/strong> operations.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        Key Components of Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

        A robust Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is more than a list of \u201cgood names.\u201d It typically includes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
        • A controlled vocabulary<\/strong>: defined terms for purposes (analytics, advertising, functional), data types (email, device ID), and vendors or destinations.<\/li>\n
        • A naming schema<\/strong>: rules for order, separators, casing, and abbreviations (for example, purpose_vendor_object_region_env<\/code>).<\/li>\n
        • A data dictionary<\/strong>: a living reference that maps names to human-readable descriptions, retention, and consent requirements.<\/li>\n
        • Governance and ownership<\/strong>: who approves new names, who maintains the dictionary, and how conflicts are resolved.<\/li>\n
        • Implementation touchpoints<\/strong>: where the convention is enforced\u2014tag manager, analytics schema, CDP event catalog, consent platform configuration, and internal docs.<\/li>\n
        • Change management<\/strong>: versioning rules and deprecation timelines so names don\u2019t drift and legacy data stays interpretable.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

          In Privacy & Consent<\/strong>, governance is a feature, not bureaucracy. Without clear ownership, a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> degrades quickly under campaign pressure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Types of Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

          There aren\u2019t universal \u201cofficial types,\u201d but in real organizations you\u2019ll see distinct contexts where a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is applied:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            \n
          1. \n

            Consent and purpose naming<\/strong>\n How you name consent categories, purposes, and preference-center options so they match your disclosures and implementation.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

          2. \n

            Tag and vendor naming<\/strong>\n Naming for pixels, scripts, and destinations (including whether they are first-party, third-party, and which purpose they serve).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

          3. \n

            Event and parameter naming<\/strong>\n Consistent analytics event names, properties, and data-layer keys with privacy-aware labeling (for example, which events are allowed pre-consent).<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

          4. \n

            Cookie and storage naming<\/strong>\n Standard patterns for cookies\/local storage keys, including lifespan, scope, and purpose\u2014critical for Privacy & Consent<\/strong> transparency.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

          5. \n

            Environment and regional variants<\/strong>\n Conventions that encode environment (dev<\/code>, stg<\/code>, prod<\/code>) and region (eu<\/code>, us<\/code>, global<\/code>) to avoid accidental production leakage or region misapplication.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

            These distinctions help you implement a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> where it matters most: in the objects that create, move, or interpret data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Real-World Examples of Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

            Example 1: E-commerce consent-aware event taxonomy<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

            An e-commerce team needs purchase-funnel measurement while respecting Privacy & Consent<\/strong> choices. They implement a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> where events include purpose and consent dependency:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              \n
            • ana_view_item<\/code> (analytics, allowed after analytics consent)<\/li>\n
            • fun_add_to_cart<\/code> (functional, allowed when strictly necessary logic applies)<\/li>\n
            • adv_begin_checkout<\/code> (advertising, only after advertising consent)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

              This makes it straightforward to configure tag firing rules and to audit which events are collected under which consent states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Example 2: Publisher cookie and vendor naming for audits<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

              A publisher works with many ad and analytics partners. They adopt a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> for cookies:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \n
              • adv_vendorX_uid_13m<\/code> (advertising, vendor identifier, user ID, retention hint)<\/li>\n
              • ana_site_session_30d<\/code> (analytics, first-party, session measurement)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                When legal or privacy teams request an inventory for Privacy & Consent<\/strong> documentation, the naming pattern accelerates classification and reduces guesswork.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Example 3: SaaS product telemetry with privacy-safe defaults<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                A SaaS company collects in-app telemetry. They define a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> that separates operational events from optional analytics:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n
                • ops_auth_login_success<\/code> (operational, needed for security\/availability)<\/li>\n
                • ana_feature_used_export<\/code> (analytics, requires consent in certain regions)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                  Engineering can ship features faster because the naming makes default handling clear and consistent across services and analytics pipelines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Benefits of Using Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                  A well-implemented Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> can deliver measurable improvements:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    \n
                  • Higher data quality<\/strong>: fewer duplicate events, fewer ambiguous fields, and cleaner schemas across analytics and warehouses.<\/li>\n
                  • Faster launches<\/strong>: teams spend less time debating names and more time executing\u2014with fewer rework cycles due to privacy review.<\/li>\n
                  • Reduced compliance risk<\/strong>: clearer mapping between what you say (disclosures) and what you do (tags\/events), strengthening Privacy & Consent<\/strong> controls.<\/li>\n
                  • More accurate reporting<\/strong>: consistent naming improves joins, aggregations, and dashboard reliability.<\/li>\n
                  • Better customer experience<\/strong>: fewer intrusive or misfired scripts, smoother preference changes, and clearer explanations in consent interfaces\u2014key outcomes for Privacy & Consent<\/strong> trust.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                    Challenges of Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                    A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> can fail if it\u2019s treated as a one-time document rather than a living system. Common challenges include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      \n
                    • Legacy sprawl<\/strong>: old tags and event names may be inconsistent, undocumented, or owned by teams that no longer exist.<\/li>\n
                    • Cross-platform mismatch<\/strong>: analytics tools, ad platforms, and backend services often have different naming constraints (length limits, reserved characters).<\/li>\n
                    • Regional complexity<\/strong>: Privacy & Consent<\/strong> requirements vary by market; encoding region in naming helps, but it also increases naming overhead.<\/li>\n
                    • Over-engineering<\/strong>: overly complex schemas slow teams down and invite workarounds.<\/li>\n
                    • Weak enforcement<\/strong>: if new tags\/events can be created without review, the convention decays and naming drift returns.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                      The goal is not perfection; it\u2019s sustained clarity and auditability at scale.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                      Best Practices for Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                      To make a Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> durable and useful:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        \n
                      • Start with the highest-risk objects<\/strong>: prioritize vendor\/tag naming, consent categories, and event schemas before edge cases.<\/li>\n
                      • Use a consistent structure<\/strong>: define ordering (purpose \u2192 vendor\/system \u2192 object \u2192 region \u2192 environment), separators, and casing.<\/li>\n
                      • Make consent requirements explicit<\/strong>: include purpose indicators that map directly to Privacy & Consent<\/strong> categories used in your preference center.<\/li>\n
                      • Keep a single source of truth<\/strong>: maintain a data dictionary that is easy to search and update, with examples and \u201cdo\/don\u2019t\u201d guidance.<\/li>\n
                      • Add lightweight governance<\/strong>: define who approves additions and how quickly (for example, a same-day review SLA for campaign tags).<\/li>\n
                      • Version and deprecate responsibly<\/strong>: avoid renaming casually; when changes are needed, document migration paths so historical reporting remains coherent.<\/li>\n
                      • Test and monitor<\/strong>: periodically scan for new\/unknown cookies, unauthorized tags, or nonconforming event names\u2014then fix upstream.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                        A practical Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> should feel like a guardrail, not a roadblock.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                        Tools Used for Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                        A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is operationalized through tool categories, not a single product. Common tool groups include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          \n
                        • Consent management platforms<\/strong>: to define consent categories\/purposes and connect them to tag firing rules\u2014central to Privacy & Consent<\/strong> execution.<\/li>\n
                        • Tag management systems<\/strong>: to standardize tag names, triggers, variables, and environments; often the first place naming drift becomes visible.<\/li>\n
                        • Analytics tools and event schema catalogs<\/strong>: to enforce event naming rules, validate parameters, and manage changes over time.<\/li>\n
                        • Customer data platforms and data warehouses<\/strong>: where naming impacts downstream identity stitching, segmentation, and governance.<\/li>\n
                        • Privacy management and documentation systems<\/strong>: to map processing activities, retention, and data categories to implementation artifacts.<\/li>\n
                        • Reporting dashboards and BI layers<\/strong>: where consistent naming reduces metric duplication and makes self-serve reporting safer.<\/li>\n
                        • Workflow systems<\/strong> (tickets, code reviews, checklists): to embed naming review into release processes.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                          Even in mature Privacy & Consent<\/strong> programs, workflow discipline is often the difference between \u201cdocumented\u201d and \u201cenforced.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Metrics Related to Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                          You can measure whether your Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is working by tracking operational and quality indicators:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                            \n
                          • Naming compliance rate<\/strong>: percentage of new tags\/events\/cookies that follow the convention.<\/li>\n
                          • Unknown artifact count<\/strong>: number of unclassified cookies, scripts, or events discovered in scans.<\/li>\n
                          • Consent gating accuracy<\/strong>: share of tags\/events correctly blocked or allowed based on Privacy & Consent<\/strong> choices.<\/li>\n
                          • Time-to-approve new tracking<\/strong>: cycle time from request to compliant deployment (a proxy for scalability).<\/li>\n
                          • Data dictionary coverage<\/strong>: percent of active events\/fields documented with purpose, description, and owner.<\/li>\n
                          • Reporting defect rate<\/strong>: number of dashboard issues caused by ambiguous or duplicated naming.<\/li>\n
                          • Audit readiness<\/strong>: time required to produce a current inventory of vendors, cookies, and purposes.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                            These metrics keep the Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> grounded in outcomes, not aesthetics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                            Future Trends of Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                            Several trends are pushing Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> practices to evolve within Privacy & Consent<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              \n
                            • Automation and policy-as-code<\/strong>: organizations increasingly encode naming rules into validation scripts, CI checks, and tag governance tooling.<\/li>\n
                            • AI-assisted classification<\/strong>: AI can help suggest purposes, detect unknown cookies, and flag naming anomalies\u2014useful, but still needs human governance for Privacy & Consent<\/strong> accuracy.<\/li>\n
                            • Server-side and first-party data architectures<\/strong>: as tracking moves server-side, consistent naming becomes even more critical to maintain transparency and enforce consent downstream.<\/li>\n
                            • Standardized privacy disclosures and frameworks<\/strong>: as industry frameworks mature, purpose naming and vendor labeling will trend toward more consistent, comparable terminology.<\/li>\n
                            • Measurement constraints and privacy regulation changes<\/strong>: as browsers and regulations restrict identifiers, clean schemas and clear consent-aware naming help preserve trustworthy measurement.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                              The direction is clear: Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is becoming a core data discipline, not an optional documentation task, in Privacy & Consent<\/strong> operations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Privacy Naming Convention vs Related Terms<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                              Privacy Naming Convention vs Data taxonomy<\/strong>\nA data taxonomy is a broad classification system for data (types, domains, definitions). A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is narrower and more operational: it defines how privacy-relevant items are named in tools, code, and documentation so they can be governed and audited.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Privacy Naming Convention vs UTM naming convention<\/strong>\nUTM conventions standardize campaign parameters for acquisition tracking. A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> standardizes names for consent purposes, tags, cookies, and events to support Privacy & Consent<\/strong> controls. They can complement each other, but they solve different problems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Privacy Naming Convention vs Consent policy or privacy policy<\/strong>\nA policy states what should happen. A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> helps ensure it actually happens in implementation. In Privacy & Consent<\/strong>, the naming layer often becomes the practical bridge between legal language and technical execution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                              Who Should Learn Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                                \n
                              • Marketers<\/strong> benefit because clearer naming speeds campaign launches and reduces surprises in measurement and compliance reviews.<\/li>\n
                              • Analysts<\/strong> benefit because consistent event and field names produce cleaner datasets, more reliable dashboards, and fewer \u201cwhat does this mean?\u201d mysteries.<\/li>\n
                              • Agencies<\/strong> benefit because standardized naming reduces handoff friction and makes multi-client governance more repeatable.<\/li>\n
                              • Business owners and founders<\/strong> benefit because a strong Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> lowers risk and enables scalable growth without constant rework.<\/li>\n
                              • Developers<\/strong> benefit because naming rules clarify requirements, reduce ad hoc decisions, and make Privacy & Consent<\/strong> enforcement easier to implement and test.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                Summary of Privacy Naming Convention<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                                A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is a standardized approach to naming consent categories, purposes, tags, cookies, events, and privacy documentation artifacts. It matters because consistent naming improves auditability, reduces compliance risk, and increases the reliability of marketing measurement. In Privacy & Consent<\/strong>, it acts as the shared language that connects policy to real implementation. When done well, Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> supports scalable governance, clearer user transparency, and better operational outcomes across Privacy & Consent<\/strong> programs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                                1) What is a Privacy Naming Convention in simple terms?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                A Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> is a set of rules for naming privacy-related items (like cookies, tracking tags, and analytics events) so teams can quickly understand purpose, ownership, and consent requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                2) How does Privacy & Consent influence event naming and tagging?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                Privacy & Consent<\/strong> determines which events and tags are allowed to run under different user choices. Naming that encodes purpose (analytics vs advertising) makes consent gating, audits, and reporting far more reliable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                3) Should a Privacy Naming Convention be the same across all regions?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                The core structure should be consistent, but you may need region indicators when consent rules differ. Many teams include a region field (or metadata) so Privacy & Consent<\/strong> controls don\u2019t get mixed between markets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                4) Where do teams usually enforce a Privacy Naming Convention?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                Most teams enforce it in tag management, analytics event schemas, and data dictionaries, then reinforce it through code reviews or deployment checklists tied to Privacy & Consent<\/strong> requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                5) What\u2019s the biggest mistake companies make with Privacy Naming Convention?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                Creating a document and not operationalizing it. Without ownership, validation, and ongoing updates, naming drift returns and Privacy & Consent<\/strong> controls become harder to trust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                6) How detailed should Privacy Naming Convention rules be?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                Detailed enough to remove ambiguity (purpose, system\/vendor, object, environment), but not so complex that teams bypass it. If adoption is low, simplify the schema and add clearer examples.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                7) Can a Privacy Naming Convention improve marketing performance?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                Yes\u2014indirectly. By reducing misfires, data loss, and reporting confusion, a strong Privacy Naming Convention<\/strong> supports faster iteration, cleaner attribution, and fewer disruptions due to Privacy & Consent<\/strong> issues.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                A **Privacy Naming Convention** is a structured, documented way to name privacy-related items across your marketing and data stack\u2014so everyone (humans and systems) can understand what data is collected, why it\u2019s collected, and under which consent conditions it may be used. In **Privacy & Consent**, naming isn\u2019t cosmetic; it\u2019s operational. When your consent categories, tracking events, cookies, tags, and data purposes are consistently named, you reduce compliance risk, improve measurement quality, and make audits far less painful.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10235,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1916],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11608","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-privacy-consent"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11608","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10235"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11608"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11608\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11608"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11608"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wizbrand.com\/tutorials\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11608"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}