| From | Message |
|---|
tactical_abyss
26-Jun-12, 10:11
|
 Descriptive notation option....
Just an idea and a cool way to learn the traditional way players recorded their move's long before algebraic was invented.Descriptive for some,seems to give you a real "feel"of the board!
|
|
yes.
I second the motion.
Absolutely.
And it expresses the moves we make --
as in, it's not really e4 that I move, but my King's pawn to King four.
|
|
I like this suggestion too!
It will help a lot while reading old classics that were never made algebraic (Modern Chess Strategy by Pachman , Pawn Power in Chess by Kmoch, etc...).
|
baronderkilt
26-Jun-12, 20:43
|
It would be cool ...
and surely a first for GK to have it? I've certainly never seen it done anywhere. Anyone?
I'm wondering if it is a programming nightmare ? Seems like the present board using a single designation for each square must be much simpler? Like designating a pixel or something.
Wouldnt descriptive have to look at two seperate directions, thus a two view grid of some kind. And then need to actually remember the moves so as to say P-B4 when only one is available for that move, in stead of saying P-KB4 even when the QBP cannot move p-B4?
Sounds a bit like programming a chess computer tho, that remember moves. And would be starting with one system already in place to do that, I think.
YEAH GK should do this, just to be Cool !
|
tactical_abyss
27-Jun-12, 06:40
|
I'm checking now,but I do not believe any other site has the descriptive option.Perhaps it might be a good marketing strategy?As to a programming nightmare,I doubt that,just probably a new type of program,possibly involving some kind of PGN transfer of info and back again,perhaps?Keep in mind it would only be one direction not two for each individual player since each player makes the move and the program would record the move from that side of the board to the numbered move tablet of each player.So the program would have to have two sets of coordinates,not one as in algebraic and then split it in half from which ever player is making the perspective move and then record it from their rank side.It may be a tricky program,but probably not a nightmare.But then,i'm no computer expert.My nephew is an Einstein with computers,programming,hardware,building multiple core systems and more.I will ask him about this.I'm sure he will say HE could do it on a mainframe,but then convincing GK is another issue!
Still it would be nice,as long as someone dosen't program in long descriptive instead of short descriptive!Us old timers know the difference!Unless that would be a third option,ahhh,no forget it!
|
tactical_abyss
27-Jun-12, 08:26
|
I do seem to remember one chess site using symbol notation combined with descriptive,but that was so long ago I cannot remember where.Maybe the site is no longer there.
But somehow, a program is established paired with the computers view from whichever side is making the move,it should not be a monumental task.Alot of my older books have the descriptive in my collection.It would also be nice to plug in a few Morphy games from my books using the original descriptive much easier now and then have it magically appear on one of the GK boards.Then you could analyze,switching the position from various moves,annotate ect ect
a8
QR1
QR8
ect,ect.
The counterargument would be it is not as popular or set as a standard anymore.So lets revive it a bit!
|
|
Thank you for your suggestion, it will be passed on to our development team for further consideration. Please note that while we do appreciate and consider all the suggestions that we receive, unfortunately we are unable to guarantee that all of them will be implemented or how soon. We will certainly try our best, of course.
|
bigpeta
27-Jun-12, 15:34
|
chessbase
will show the game in descriptive notation if you wish.
|
|
my Dads chess book collection
my dad left me a valuable collection of old chess books.They are mostly in the old descriptive
notation. Its fun translating from descriptive to the modern and back again.
|
|
I reckon...
... quite a lot of us senior citizens - supposing I qualify- have become accustomed to both. Almost all my OTB games were written in the Descriptive notation, which was, after all, the notation most used in the books I read. Not that they were many. Occasionally I tried the Algebraic, even the FIDE notation for a while, but always went back to the old system. Mind you, I never had any trouble following a game with algebraic or figurine notation.
But I find since starting GK that I've become so accustomed to the Algebriac, I am writing down my games with it, and even thinking in Algebraic at least as much as in Descriptive.
Although it doesn't matter all that much to me, I would would mark the 'Yes' box on this vote.
|
