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 0.01 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.