Author: Michel Langeveld
Date: 13:22:26 08/22/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 22, 1999 at 16:11:50, Brian T. Hamm wrote: >On August 22, 1999 at 15:02:09, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >> >>I'd like to know, too. I would also like to know if there is a common standard >>for descriptive notation. >> >I don't know if there is an actual standard, but at least the few places I still >see descriptive notation offer answers to your ambiguity questions (see below). > >Keep in mind, I'm no expert on descriptive notation and any errors I make are a >good hint at why I use standard algebraic notation. > >> >>Here are some questions: >> >>If white has pawns on f4 and f5, and black has pawns on e5 and e6, how do you >>describe fxe6? >> >PxP(K6) > >> >>If white has knights on f3 and f5, how do you say N3d4? >> >N(B3)-Q4 > >> >>If white has pawns on d4 and c4, and black has pawns on d5 and c5, is dxc5 >>written as PxBP or QPxP, and if either of those is ambiguous do you use the >>other one? >> > >PxBP seems sufficient... > >Where ambiguity is concerned, I believe the idea is to always minimize the >amount of characters necessary to convey a move distinctly. > >> >>I've never seen an established standard for disambiguating descriptive >notation. >> > >Perhaps the easiest way to maintain a common use standard on descriptive >notation is to parallel what current programs use. > >For instance, I think FileMate (a .PGN editing utility) allows descriptive >notation, and mimicry may not be a bad idea as needed. > >-Brian If you want to learn descriptive notation then you can use Chessbase 7.0. goto status -> options -> Notation -> and click on P-Q4. Don't use engines anymore.. else you see another bug of ChessBase! Kind regards, Michel Langeveld
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.