Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:12:47 07/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 11, 2001 at 19:02:24, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On July 11, 2001 at 18:55:45, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>>As a consequence the FEN generated from such positions is not strictly >>>correct according to the standard from SJE, but IMO the standard should >>>be changed, here. >> >>Yes, I think the current PGN standard is broken in regard to e.p. squares. >> >>For instance, how many distinct positions is this: >>[D]rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/3p4/3P4/8/PPP1PPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - >>You can make 4 of them, if you have to set e.p. flags, but there is only one >>real position. Multiply the number of potential pawns affected and it explodes >>with great stupidity. > >Wait a sec. Does the FEN standard according to SJE state that you *have* to >have the ep square set to e3 after 1. e4? If so, that is dumb and I'm going to >happily ignore it. The square shouldn't be set unless there is a legal capture, >or at least it should be optional to set it if there isn't. "16.1.3.4: En passant target square The fourth field is the en passant target square. If there is no en passant target square then the single character symbol "-" appears. If there is an en passant target square then is represented by a lowercase file character immediately followed by a rank digit. Obviously, the rank digit will be "3" following a white pawn double advance (Black is the active color) or else be the digit "6" after a black pawn double advance (White being the active color). An en passant target square is given if and only if the last move was a pawn advance of two squares. Therefore, an en passant target square field may have a square name even if there is no pawn of the opposing side that may immediately execute the en passant capture." Notice the second paragraph. Ugh.
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.