Date: Sun, 15 Jun 1997 14:32:59 -0400 From: "William M. Shubert" Subject: Re: SGF complaints Rene, I don't see your problem about AB/AW/AE. I think they're fine, they are one thing that I would *not* change. So what if they're not reversible? How long, on a modern machine, does it really take to start over from scratch and replay up to the previous move? Or if CPU time is really that critcal, why not have a board copy at each position so far? And as for comment, what you ask for is already there. Simply adding "\" before a newline makes it "soft" as you want, and a non-escaped newline is automatically "hard". About M/L/etc., if you want to be backwards compatible, there's nothing to prevent your viewer from understanding these "obsolete" tags. The standard simply states that you shouldn't *emit* these tags and call the file FF[4]. As for variations, I don't like having multiple options either, but I don't like your proposed scheme because it makes it impossible to have variations without showing the user where they will be. This might be undesirable in some situations, such as when presenting a problem - seeing where the variations are would be a huge hint! IMHO we should specify that nothing is shown for variations, and users can add tags if they want to show more, but I seem to be in a minority here so I'm willing to shut up in the interests of keeping the spec moving towards completion. -- -Bill (wms@hevanet.com) http://www.hevanet.com/wms/