Author: James Swafford
Date: 17:32:05 09/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2001 at 19:55:18, Bob Green wrote: >Yep, this standard would be a **whole** lot more chatty...that is the biggest >downside of XML. But the fact that any ol' computer can read it w/o writing a >bunch of code is the upside and humans can still follow it pretty well. > >The existing PGN notation schema (i.e. the rules to follow when writing a PGN >document) could be converted to an XML Schema fairly simply - let's call this >new XML language PGN-XML. Since it is a new language we could throw in some >bones to non-chess games as well (no problem since XML is intrinsically >extensible.) An add some tags for clock control...optional naturally. > >Then some sharp cats could write a PGN to PGN-XML converter. > >In any event, this is a radical approach to a simple extention to the PGN >standard. Does anyone besides me see some merit in this? Pros and cons to everything. Pros: it's easier to parse. I'm not too worried about that though. Most chess programmers enjoy programming, after all. :) Cons: I'll refer you to your previous statement. "Yep, this standard would be a **whole** lot more chatty...that is the biggest downside of XML. " With all due respect, I would not favor it. -- James > >Bob Green
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.