@jch2103 I am hopelessly confused by your post and I am sorry that it has taken me this long to get to review it. My confusion is that when I attempt to put the keywords that you have into IMatch I actually get out what you are suggesting PL5 is putting in with the tests you have done!!
So Imatch, with my ‘Preference’ settings is getting (this is Picmeta PIE output)
This is me entering (or attempting to enter!!) your hierarchical keywords into IMatch and it created the very keywords you suggest that PL5 has added, i.e. with my IMatch settings I cannot recreate your NEF .xmp sidecar file this is what I got out of IMatch 2021.14.2 which uses ExifTool 12.39 instead P1074441.xmp (5.2 KB).
This is actually a better match for what you are suggesting PL5 created when it encountered your sidecar rather than the sidecar you published.
Even worse in my tests PL5 did not add anything to your sidecar and the exported JPGs exactly matched your xmp sidecar (certainly in version PL5.1.3) of all the programs I tested only two added the ‘flat’ keywords to the JPG ‘hr’ data namely, C1 and IMatch itself!!!
To summarise:
- I cannot recreate your sidecar using IMatch (with my IMatch setting etc.)
- PL5 when it encountered your sidecar left things alone in the exported jpg.
- C1 and IMatch when using your sidecar settings actually did add the additional keywords to the ‘hr’ but no other programs that I tested did!!
I am truly sorry I ever encountered this and the related posts because my results make no sense against yours or vice versa.
We need a “drains up” chat and then I will eat “humble pie” when you show me the error of my ways!
PIE also uses ExifTool like IMatch and …
Edited 2022/01/27 @ 12:31:-
The following shows my current settings and the keywords that I entered into IMatch for the photo (sorry the photo is nowhere near as interesting as I suspect yours was!)
The following is a comparison of the sidecar files, IMatch of the left - your data on the right!
’dc’:-
’hr:-
