{
  "spec": "LRFS v1.0",
  "spec_section": "LRFS v1.0 §3.2",
  "category": "failure-modes",
  "id": "004-empty-payload",
  "description": "XMP packet is well-formed and contains the LRFS namespace, but declares zero layers and no signature. This is distinct from a file with no LRFS metadata at all. Conformant readers MUST treat this as a file with no semantic layer (not a parse error, not a verification failure) and return an empty layer set without crashing.",
  "inputs": {
    "xmp_packet_utf8": "<?xpacket begin=\"\ufeff\" id=\"W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d\"?>\n<x:xmpmeta xmlns:x=\"adobe:ns:meta/\" x:xmptk=\"LRFS 1.0\">\n  <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#\">\n    <rdf:Description rdf:about=\"\" xmlns:llmind=\"https://llmind.org/ns/1.0/\"/>\n  </rdf:RDF>\n</x:xmpmeta>\n<?xpacket end=\"w\"?>"
  },
  "expected_outcome": "ignore",
  "reason": "The file contains a valid but empty LRFS container. Readers must distinguish this (valid empty payload) from both (a) a file with no LRFS metadata at all, and (b) a corrupt or partial LRFS payload. The correct behavior is to return an empty layer set and NO error — the file is simply not semantically enriched."
}