Originally Posted by
shefgab
No, I don't work for Delta (or the Chinese, or the OP, or a visa agent).
As I said before, this policy was introduced and called TRANSIT without visa. Clearly the OP's ticket is transiting in Tokyo with Shanghai as a destination, so I don't think it's accurate to say that the OP was doing "something the Chinese are perfectly happy about" (possibly something they ignore, or something they don't realise is happening (they only ask what flight you've come off, and where to next)), otherwise they'd have just introduced a "3 day visa free entry" or similar. Why go to the bother of making it a
TWOV rather than just
Visit WOV? (Now, don't throw a wobbly, just think about it!)
I imagine the reason you have to go from country A to China to country B is that they DON'T want people to avoid getting a visa if China is the main purpose of travel (as it was in this case). I imagine the Chinese thought that their wording would eliminate situations such as a quick transit in a 3rd country without leaving the airport (like the OP), although weren't quite canny enough to stop this eventutality. Maybe with more occurences like this, feedback will find its way back, and the wording will be made stricter (e.g. the traveller must pass immigration in country A and country B).
I was just looking at the situation in an analytical way, seeing where the benefits in each arguement lay. Personally, it doesn't affect me if the OP got to China or not. I am impartial! Why is everyone so indignant? I'm just looking at how it might have been seen my the DL agent who is responsible for checking these things. Who knows, perhaps DL had repercussions from the Chinese for a similar itinerary? I mean, without a change of planes in Tokyo, it's a straight forward return to PVG which does require a visa.
Are there any other situations in the World where you can avoid getting a visa because of where you changed planes on your way there? 
Nearly all complete nonsense? Thanks. Actually, I think most of it is accurate irrespective of if DL were wrong.
Any reason to say I'm insane? That's quite really quite offensive. I hadn't realised everyone on this forum had so much rage against people that don't agree. Yikes. Don't worry, I'll not be back!
Anyway, don't worry folks, you can put your pitchforks down! On the record I say: I was wrong! Delta was certainly wrong! DL
should be banned from flying to China (I believe I read that suggestion upthread). Without a shadow of a doubt, the OP should have been allowed access to China on the TWOV.
Transit without visa, or alternatively 'transit visa' are commonly accepted terms. TIMATIC is peppered with it, and most countries either have either some waiver, (or some requirement), to obtain a visa if you are in transit through their country.
While I appreciate your reasoning, I think the Chinese are pretty switched on. They want the $$ passengers in 'transit' and entering the country will spend. Taxis, hotels, food. They'd rather have someone visit china for three days without a visa, than not visit at all because they can't be bothered to send off the application forms.
As you pointed out, under your reasoning, simply by checking-in again in Tokyo, would have 'properly' triggered TWOV. Well I guess the Chinese can't see the point in that. And the airlines can't see the point in that.
So the requirement is simply 'inbound boarding pass' and 'outbound ticket'.
If we were to extend your reasoning to its ultimate end, it would mean TWOV should only be available for passengers on Chinese airlines,
or, connecting in China to a Chinese airline for a destination only served by a Chinese airline.
Otherwise you'd potentially have the argument that a passenger flying from London on BA, connecting to Hong Kong on CX in Shanghai, shouldn't really be allowed TWOV because they could have flown BA direct to Hong Kong. The 'transit' in PVG is completely artificial... manufactured to have a stay in China without the need for a visa.