Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:08:56 10/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2000 at 12:37:33, Bruce Moreland wrote: [snip] >The guy who owns PGN is Steven J. Edwards. He has been claiming for several >years that a revision is in the works. He does not want help. When I proposed >some new NAG's that would get PGN in line with Informant notation he told me >essentially that he would be discussing the new standard with "experts such as >Bob Hyatt", which I took as "go away". > >Steven J. Edwards has decreed that 0-0 (zero-zero) means double forfeit, so he >reserves that token. > >This is obviously wrong but good luck getting him to change it. > >An obvious compromise is to check for 0-0 (zero-zero) in the result tag, and if >it's present, don't convert 0-0 (zero-zero) as O-O (oh-oh) in the move list. >Good luck getting him to listen. > >A problem with PGN is that it was designed as an interchange format. This means >that computers generate it, and computers eat it. Computers don't have to deal >with 0-0 (zero-zero) or "e2e4" or "ba6" (when B is either a bishop or a pawn), >and so forth. > >This is a problem because people type the stupid stuff in by hand, and even >people who program computers mess up more or less constantly. So you do have to >cope with non-standard algebraic. I don't think there is a "standard" regarding >how you deal with non-standard algebraic. I have found SJE to be somewhat more compliant than your experience came to be. You might try your requests again. Maybe he was just having 'one of those days'. As far as crappy PGN, I don't think such things are the fault of the standard. No matter what notation you choose, people are going to make transcription errors. We can just as easily find fault with any of the other formats for the same reasons, if not following directions were a fault of the format. You could have some sort of very clever program that analyzes crappy PGN and tries to create something sensible out of it. I think Winboard, CDB and Extract have the best "read crappy PGN" interfaces. The overall PGN Standard document is a great effort, and I think it is much easier to read PGN than other notational styles (probably just because I am used to it). The EPD extension to FEN is (I think) a superb idea. The next iteration of the PGN standard will have a storage format EPD which does not record en passant squares when they have no possible outcome on the effect of the game. This will be especially helpful for analysis.
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.