Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 10:37:36 02/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2003 at 09:37:20, Russell Reagan wrote: >On February 01, 2003 at 08:08:05, David Rasmussen wrote: > >>Sure, it can be used for some things. But for just setting up a position with no >>context, the halfmove clock is meaningless, IMO. > >Obviously it IS useful, at the cost of a maximum of 3 extra bytes. To add in >what you want (which is PGN), it costs more bytes than a one line string. FEN is >just a convienient way to accurately specify the vast majority of positions. If >it fails to accurately describe a position, then you can always post PGN, and >when someone else posts a position that you feel isn't accurately described by >the FEN string, you could ask them to post the PGN. I'm really not sure what >you're going for here. The standard isn't going to change for 0.001% of the >positions that this might be applicable to. I am aware of all that. I am just saying that since for such positions, a fen is necesary, that the halfmove clock shouldn't be part of the FEN specification, it should always be assumed to be 0. A FEN with a halfmove clock other than 0 is undefined or meaningless, in a sense. /David
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.