Author: Odd Gunnar Malin
Date: 02:03:31 10/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 30, 2005 at 23:48:42, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>As far as I know there has been no revision to the standard for ten years.
>Please correct me if I am wrong, and I would love to be wrong.
>
There was som query in RGCC (by Edwards) some 2-3 years ago for input to get the
pgn up to date.
>Problems:
>
>1) No clear definition of export standard. Is there one writer that is
>considered the standard?
>
>2) NAGs do not correlate well with Informant/ECO symbols. There are some ECO
>meanings that don't exist, and other NAGs are ambiguous in that context. This
>sounds like a trivial problem, but it causes hell if you try to write something
>that reads PGN, converts to some sane format for editing, and then write it back
>out to PGN.
>
Chessbase have made an extention to this, I think I have posted it before and
also sent it to Edwards so he could think of putting it (or something similar)
into the standard for the next version.
A copy from one of my headerfile:
// The NAG value below 139 is comming from Andrew Templeton on rgcc
"with the idea",
"aimed against",
"better is",
"worse is",
"equal is",
"RR",
"N",
"weak point",
"endgame",
"line",
"diagonal",
"White has pair of bishops",
"Black has pair of bishops",
"Bishops of opposite color",
"Bishops of same color",
"White has united pawns",
"Black has united pawns",
"White has separated pawns",
"Black has separated pawns",
"White has doubled pawns",
"Black has doubled pawns",
"White has passed pawn",
"Black has passed pawn",
"White has adv. in no. pawns",
"Black has adv. in no. pawns"
First is $140 and so on.
(The wording is mine to fit into my programs, so the original could differs
somewhere.)
You can not thrust this before it geting into the standard but it could help
when reading pgn-files posted on the net, many comes from a CB program.
>3) The standard allows comments in stupid places, some of which won't seem
>stupid to some people.
>
>Assume you are parsing a file, and you find a comment. You really want to
>attach it to a move. This is kind of hard to do if the comment follows the last
>game in the file, if it occurs between games, occurs in the middle of a tag,
>etc.
A pgn content a tag-section and a move section. The move section is terminated
by a termination flag (same as put into the result tag). Isn't anyting that
comes between this terminator and the next tag-section meant to be ignored?
I think I have seen programs that use this in this manner to be able to
delete/replace games without writing the hole file again.
Odd Gunnar
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.