On Sat, Feb 05, 2022 at 09:59:44AM +0100, luigi scarso wrote:
 
> it's not redefined -- it's dropped. And this is ok.
> You can also check with
>   <dc:description>FOO</dc:description>
>       <dc:title>
>         <rdf:Alt>
>           <rdf:li xml:lang="x-default">TITLE</rdf:li>
>         </rdf:Alt>
>       </dc:title>
> and again it's valid.
> But
> https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:19005:-1:ed-1:v2:cor:1:v1:en
> and
> https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:19005:-1:ed-1:v2:cor:2:v1:en:tab:1
> suggest that dc:description and dc:title are of the same type,
> which is coherent with
> XMPSpecificationPart1.pdf
> as in
> https://github.com/adobe/XMP-Toolkit-SDK/tree/main/docs
> 
> I.e. these are correct   --  but Subject must agree with dc:description
>   <dc:description>
>         <rdf:Alt>
>           <rdf:li xml:lang="x-default"/>
>         </rdf:Alt>
>       </dc:description>
>       <dc:title>
>         <rdf:Alt>
>           <rdf:li xml:lang="x-default">TITLE</rdf:li>
>         </rdf:Alt>
>       </dc:title>
> 
> At least, this is what I understand.
>

From what I understand, ConTeXt applies a custom Dublin Core schema
containing just a redefinition of dc:description, which is not coherent
with how dc:description is written by the application.

This patch to lpdf-pda.xml removes the validation error.

> -- 
> luigi

-- 
Karl Pettersson, Sweden
Uppsala

https://static-dust.klpn.se/