Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Ten years later: revising EPD/FEN/PGN

Author: Jon Dart

Date: 20:51:32 09/09/03

Go up one level in this thread


On September 09, 2003 at 18:33:22, Steven Edwards wrote:


>FEN: One deficiency exists for which I take responsibility; the en passant
>target square semantics should indicate a non null value only if an active color
>pawn attacks the passed-over target square.  A change here will improve position
>database operation and can also have a positive effect on internal transposition
>management.  Also, there is the possibility of extending the castling
>availability semantics to accommodate heterodox / unorthodox chess.

Even in normal chess, if you take into account the previous history of the game,
there are six possible castling statuses. Arasan names these as follows:

                     CanCastleEitherSide,
                     CanCastleKSide,
                     CanCastleQSide,
                     CastledKSide,
                     CastledQSide,
                     CantCastleEitherSide

FEN can't currently distinguish these: it can only indicate whether or not
castling is possible, not whether or not it has occurred.

>4. The centipawn evaluation operand type needs a mate score indication
>correction.
>
>5. The centipawn evaluation  operand type probably needs to be deprecated and
>replaced with a pawn evaluation operand type with a provision for sub-pawn
>decimal resolution.

I don't really understand these.

--Jon



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.