Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

> On 8 Apr 2017, at 15:14, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p_at_wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> 2017-04-08 15:59 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson <everson_at_evertype.com>:
> >> We’re not proposing to “implement a game”.
> >
> > You were yourself speaking about applications, me too, not just a "game".
>
> No, I wasn’t.
>
> I can quote your own message just posted 3 hours ago? YOU REALLY USED the term "game" and wanted developers to use fonts for them.

Please learn to read.

> This is definitely not what most chess game developers do and have done since long, becaues fonts are definitely not easily integrable and give unpredictable results. They would not accept the kind of fallbacks you document for encoding in plain text.
>
> QUOTING YOUR OWN MESSAGE BELOW.
>
> 2017-04-08 13:10 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson <everson_at_evertype.com>:
> Developers can already use the encoded chess characters in game apps if they want.
>
> If we have a set of standardized variation sequences for chess notation, then if game developers want to use them, who is to complain?

This means, I would not complain, because that isn’t the point of the proposal, and if they use text and fonts or if they use graphics is of no consequence. They can do whatever they need for their purposess.

> But that is not the point of this proposal,

See? Gaming apps is not the point of the proposal.

> which is to enable people working with chess notation to be able to use the UCS (which they aren’t doing). An app interface has not the same plain-text requirement that people working with chess data do.
>
> (They ARE using fonts, which shows they want to do this in text. They are NOT using UCS characters, and they do NOT have a coherent model amongst any of their hacks.)
>
Received on Sat Apr 08 2017 - 14:21:21 CDT