Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

From: Richard Wordingham <>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 20:33:55 +0100

On Sun, 2 Apr 2017 10:43:39 -0700
Asmus Freytag <> wrote:

> In these cases, explicit encoding would better cover what is desired:
> a reliable way to mark a distinction between different symbols (the
> two bishops are separate symbols, that also happen to express
> distinct, though related concepts -- it is not a single symbol with
> some ignorable attributes).

There was no intention to encode the bishops separately. It just
happens that the rules of chess allow one to distinguish the bishops
simply by recording the colour of the square they are currently on.

The basic text elements in the scheme other than boundary markers will

empty white square
empty black square
white square with specific piece on it
black square with specific piece on it.

If the variation selectors are ignored, these simplify to:

white square
hatched square
specific piece

This preserves all the information; the pattern of squares is known in
advance and therefore redundant.

Received on Mon Apr 03 2017 - 14:34:15 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Apr 03 2017 - 14:34:15 CDT