Author: Tim Mirabile
Date: 18:09:32 09/11/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 1998 at 22:46:01, Keith Ian Price wrote: >The only trouble I see with this, is that this has been available for some time >without any programmers save Bob and some other freeware programs supporting it. >If we declare a subset of it to be a 'standard', what incentive will there be to >have it included in commercial programs? The way Auto232 got to be the current >'standard' is by implementing the same double parsing scheme that Bob complained >about, in order to trick the commercial programs into thinking they were >receiving commands through their normal interface. Once it became the standard, >then the commercials began including code for it in their programs. A standard >is useless if no one implements it. Compare this to the implementation of the PGN standard. If the standard is well-defined and easy to implement I think it will be implemented widely because no author would want to be one of the few who don't have it. While many people don't have two computers for Auto232, just about all of us can play over FICS.
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.