Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:41:00 10/06/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 05, 2005 at 22:38:42, Bruce Moreland wrote: >If I recall correctly, EPD was a standard invented by John Stanback and promoted >by Steven J Edwards. Stanback used it to communicate moves back and forth >between programs via a text file. Edwards apparently had an aggressive plan to >extend this via a suite of weirdly named utilities that I had never heard of >before, so I expect they never were written. > >These days, EPD is used to store test suites. > >Some of the EPD operands appear to suggest the idea that you will run the EPD >through your program, and out the other end will pop another EPD, which has a >bunch of fields filled in that can be used to calculate and interpret results. > >Does anyone use these fields? Does anyone in practical reality ever use the >fields other than "am" (avoid move), "bm" (best move), "id" (a title), and maybe >"hmvc" and "fmvn", which are the two fields of the FEN that don't appear in the >EPD? > >My guess is that all of the opcodes are dead except for these five. > >Anyone else have a contradictory opinion? > >bruce It is pretty hopeless. Even PGN has its issues, such as no consistent way to introduce annotations, or other computer-generated stuff like evaluations, etc. FEN has quirks such as requiring an EP target if the last move was a 2-square pawn push, even if no enemy pawn can recapture. Alas, they are so ingrained in everything, that changing the standards to be more reasonable would be tough due to the volume of data already out in "net land". Shoot, half the programs that produce PGN can't even get "castle" correctly and use zeros rather than ohs. Not to mention things like 1.e4 rather than 1. e4. I end up parsing proper and improper PGN correctly, just to keep the complaint level down. :)
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.