Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:34:11 -0400
From: David Fotland <fotland@hpihoah.cup.hp.com>
Subject: Re: SGF FF[4] - version 9 


Sounds great!  I've switched back to FF[4].  I'll be distributing some
pro game records (uncommented) with the new Many Faces of Go, and I'll
convert them to FF[4].  I won't put any restrictions on redistributing
these records, so there will be some FF[4] files floating around soon.

-David

> 
> Hello again,
> 
> I've uploaded a new version of the draft to 
> http://www.cis.tu-graz.ac.at/home/hollosi

I just get a red page that says "waste bandwidth at every opportunity"?

> 
> Two remarks before I start listing the changes:
> 
> - the FF4 example has been updated according to the draft
> 
> - SGFC V0.5 (the syntax checker/converter/reference implementation)
>   is available. Some missing properties have been added, new options and
>   bug fixes. Have a look.
> 
> 
> Changes from version 8 to version 9:
> ------------------------------------
> 
> - Pass [tt] may be used for boards <= 19x19
>   (for compatibility)

Good

> 
> - TC property removed (private to SGB)
>   use V instead

Good

> 
> - corrected value type of IT & DO
>   value type is none (not double) -- sorry for this mistake
> 
> - TB & TW definition extended:
>   may mark area too (if rule set uses area counting)

Currently I don't support these.

> 
> - Long labels again (requested by Anders)
>   Have a look at the FF4 example file for four different ways of 
>   displaying long labels (you may come up with an own idea too).
>   Note: no discussion about this point please!
>   Long labels are a feature just like rectangular boards or VW&DD.
>   No applications HAS TO implement them - but it's nonsense to have
>   a limitation in the file format itself.

Agreed

> 
> - NEW: how to convert old FF[123] files to FF[4]
>   Listing of old properties and how to convert them and description
>   of errors that frequently occur.

Great!

> 
> - Corrected spelling mistakes and other errors
> 
> 
> Open questions:
> 
> - should we remove BO & WO properties?
>   I don't think that they'll be used much

Please do.  There are so many different overtime rules that the text field
in OT is best to describe what is going on.  These should be computer-go
extensions to give the computer player an idea of the overtime.

> 
> - should we allow text after a collection and in between game-trees?
>   Actually EVERY reader has to skip text there anyway (if it can handle
>   collections) - due to the fact that many SGF files have a trailing mail 
>   signature which would be (otherwise) treated like an error.

Shouldn't readers be required to ignore all text outside of game trees? MF
will only support one tree per file.

> 
> - Anders suggested using the identifier SC for SQ.
>   Note: SC was defined as 'secure stones' in FF[123].
>         SGB marked SC's as square.
>   Should we use SC with new meaning 'mark with square' instead of 'secure sto
nes'?

I don't like changing the meaning of old identifiers.  I'd prefer using
a new unused one.

-David
> 
> 
> 
> /Arno