Re: [NTG-context] roadmap

On Tue, 15 May 2018 16:51:13 +0200 luigi scarso wrote:

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 4:46 PM, Christoph Reller < christoph.reller@gmail.com> wrote:

...

On Tue, 15 May 2018 08:23:04 +0200 luigi scarso wrote:

...

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:15 AM, Christoph Reller < christoph.reller@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Our company is producing (and weekly updating) 67 manuals and technical documents from more than 900 ConTeXt source files for our software products. The output PDFs are converted to PDF/A-2a, which is only possible due to ConTeXt's tagging.

What do you think of verapdf ?

Well, verapdf is only a validator and not a converter.

And, by the way, there is no reasonable way to convert from, say, PDF/A-2b to PDF/A-2a without a rediculous amount of AI or manual input because the tagging cannot be created out of the blue. It has to be there from the document's birth. This is what makes this ConTeXt feature so precious.

sure, the point is if verapdf is reliable as validator.

In my opinion, verapdf has one advantage a couple of disadvantages: + If everything works out as planned then verapdf may become one of the most widely adopted validators, free of charge and open source - verapdf is yet relatively new and hence inmature - verapdf currently only validates against the PDF/A specifications and not (really) against the PDF specifications. This is bad because the latter are integral parts of the former. - verapdf does not validate embedded streams such as images, font files and color profiles. In short: Only if you are sure that the input document is a valid PDF, then verapdf can be used to test PDF/A conformance. Cheers, Christoph