Author: Reinhard Scharnagl
Date: 07:28:55 07/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 27, 2005 at 09:42:55, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 27, 2005 at 03:42:05, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: >>But when the situation is not changing (e.g. by the Chess960 WNCA to publish >>quality concepts for Chess960 representations in FEN, PGN and GUI gestures) I >>will work on other ideas like Go programming etc.. >> >>Reinhard. Hi Uri, >It is your decision but I do not understand how notation disagreement(of things >like how to encode castling) can convince people not to work on chess960. well, because I seem to be unable to communicate my thoughts. Even you obviously did not get the point. It is not a question of not agreeing to something of a matter of taste, but a question of being compatible or not. >As far as I understand there is already a tool to translate Shredder's notation >to your notation and the opposite(see >http://www.volker-pittlik.name/wbforum/viewtopic.php?t=3135). First, why not integrate that tool inside of Shredder? Second, the "Converter" cannot be bidirectional, because the FEN Shredder has chosen simply is incompatible. Try it with SP-518 created in Shredder and with the classic starting array, too. >I see no reason that protocol will not allow every program to choose between >X-Fen and Shredder's Fen in the same way that arena allows both UCI engines and >winboard engines to play inside it inspite of the fact that they are using a >different protocol. You focus that problem on a family of applications sharing to be incompatible. Thus you cannot see the problem. Let me show some examples: Take a Chess960 game notation from BrainKing as PGN: [Event "Casual Game"] [Site "BrainKing.com (Prague, Czech Republic)"] [Date "2005.01.29"] [Round "?"] [White "tangram"] [Black "lukulus"] [Result "0-1"] [SetUp "1"] [FEN "rnbkrqnb/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBKRQNB w KQkq - 0 1"] 1. g3 g6 2. f4 d6 3. d3 Nh6 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. Nf3 Bd7 6. e4 O-O-O 7. Be3 f5 8. exf5 Nxf5 9. Bf2 e5 10. fxe5 Nxe5 11. Nxe5 Bxe5 12. Bxa7 Qg7 13. O-O-O Bxc3 14. bxc3 Qxc3 15. Rxe8 Rxe8 16. Be4 Qa3+ 0-1 This notation is using the X-FEN as documented and used by pioneer applications since years. But Shredder (actually) is not able to understand it. Such things happen with existing online servers, databases, PGN viewers etc. ... Another example: take the 18 so called pseudo FRC positions (including the traditional chess starting array) 414, 430, 446, 454, 460, 461, 502, 508, 509, 518, 524, 525, 532, 533, 548, 549, 629, 693 and select e.g. 502. This will have a FEN "rqbnkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RQBNKBNR w KQkq - 0 1", but Shredder has "rqbnkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RQBNKBNR w HAha -". Nevertheless all those arrays, resulting games and positions will be playable withion traditional chess programs, Shredder insists to generate a differnt FEN simply because of its incompatible Chess960 view, thus making it impossible to export such FEN to traditional chessprograms registering the castling rights. Shredder solved to problem to become able to play Chess960 by inventing an incompatible view to chess, doubling FEN representations to a common subset with and including traditional chess into strange FENs. And he did it without any need as the existing X-FEN is proving for years. Thus I understand it as a primitive attack to blame Chess960 to be an incompatible variant instead a compatible superset to chess, what it really is. Reinhard.
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.