RE: [computer-go] FF[5] (was: SGC)

["Anders Kierulf" <anders@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> There are a number of initiatives to extend SGF one way
> or another by several persons. Wouldn't it make sense to
> work on a standard FF[5] ?
> 
> Marco Scheurer
> Sen:te, Lausanne, Switzerland   http://www.sente.ch

I'm answering this question separately because I suspect it will start a
long chain of discussion. :-)

My opinion is that a new standard should clarify, simplify, and extend
concepts that have been implemented in several programs and have proven
successful. If, for example, the SGC compression gets adopted and becomes
popular, something like that is a good candidate for including in a new
standard. Pie in the sky concepts are not.

Besides working on a completely new FF[5] standard, I think there is value
in small refinements to the FF[4] specification (which is great, thanks
Arno!). For example:

- Add recommendations for ranks to distinguish between amateurs and
professionals (p for professionals, d for amateurs, k for kyu players).

- Add recommendations to test with and handle huge properties efficiently.

- Add back the CH (check mark) property that got dropped from FF[3].

- Provide links to extensions added by different SGF editors, so that
conflicts can be avoided. For example, the SmartGo extensions are documented
at http://www.smartgo.com/HTML/index.html?fileformat.htm.

Anders Kierulf
www.smartgo.com


_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/