Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [pcgen-xml] (unknown)

Expand Messages
  • Frugal
    ... I have a certain set of requirements for a truely generic system. These include (but are not limited to): - Support Core 3.0
    Message 1 of 28 , Jun 25, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      <quote who="andargor">
      > I think the problem with what you mention, getting a certain variable
      > for a certain level, is tied to the use of formulas based on a
      > progression. For example, "0.75 * class level" for BAB. I would just
      > add an entity at the appropriate level ("rank") that increases BAB by
      > one. The same would go for hit dice for races as classes progression:
      > some levels do not grant anything. I'm also thinking Bloodline levels
      > from UA having the same issue.

      I have a certain set of requirements for a truely generic system. These
      include (but are not limited to):

      - Support Core 3.0 characters
      - Support Core 3.5 characters
      - Support Epic Characters
      - Support Exclusive Skills (i.e. the complicated calculations
      for maxRanks)
      - Support Gestalt Characters (in many forms: Take highest of 2+ values;
      take sum of 2+ values; take mean of 2+ values);
      - Support Adding a race and class level at the same time (i.e. in our
      campaign the DM has decided that the player with the Astral Deva
      character gets a different XP progression, but goes up a level of
      Deva and a level of cleric at the same time).
      - Support floating point variables (i.e. Monk/Rogue BAB of 3.75/3.75
      would give a BAB of floor(3.75+3.75)=7 rather than
      floor(3.75)+floor(3.75)=6 )


      I think that if I change the way the progressions are assigned then it
      should be possible to get the value for any variable at a specific level.

      Instead of the current way:

      character
      progression:Elf
      rank:Elf[1]
      rank:Elf[2]
      rank:Elf[3]
      rank:Elf[4]
      progression:Character Level
      rank:Character Level[1]
      rank:Character Level[2]
      rank:Character Level[3]
      rank:Character Level[4]
      progression:Fighter
      rank:Fighter[1]
      progression:Monk
      rank:Monk[1]
      rank:Monk[2]
      rank:Monk[3]

      We have this:

      character
      Progression:Character Level
      Rank:Character Level[1]
      rank:Elf[1]
      Rank:Fighter[1]
      Rank:Character Level[2]
      rank:Elf[2]
      Rank:Monk[1]
      Rank:Character Level[3]
      rank:Elf[3]
      Rank:Monk[2]
      Rank:Character Level[4]
      rank:Elf[4]
      Rank:Monk[3]

      Then it will make asking "character level[3]" for a value a lot easier.
      Not Trivuial, but easier.

      > For Epic bonuses and gestalt, if you have discrete entities for BAB,
      > hit dice, etc., then all you need is a mediator object/entity
      > (something like "OnAdd" for each entity type) which does the
      > appropriate operation, e.g. "is the ECL (CL+HD+LA) > 20? then
      > override the class' BAB entity and add an Epic bonus", or "is the BAB
      > increase for this level greater for Class A than Class B? then add
      > Class A's BAB entity"

      Hmmmm. I will have to look into how to apply that sort of thing to this
      style of program.

      > Overall, good work. Your XML is more concise than mine :)

      I started from the XML and I am now trying to write an application around
      it. I think I should have started with the requirements and built the data
      model around that, then built the XML model from the data model.

      I think it might actually be time to do this properly and write up a set
      of requirements and some use cases ;O)

      --
      regards,
      Frugal
      -OS Chimp
    • Frugal
      ... I have added an extention to the variables in formulas. You can now have @ to give you the value of a variable at a
      Message 2 of 28 , Jun 29, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        <quote who="andargor">

        > I think the problem with what you mention, getting a certain variable
        > for a certain level, is tied to the use of formulas based on a
        > progression. For example, "0.75 * class level" for BAB. I would just
        > add an entity at the appropriate level ("rank") that increases BAB by
        > one. The same would go for hit dice for races as classes progression:
        > some levels do not grant anything. I'm also thinking Bloodline levels
        > from UA having the same issue.

        I have added an extention to the variables in formulas. You can now have
        <name>@<level> to give you the value of a variable at a certain level.
        Then you can do certain things like:

        <variable-bonus targetid="var.bab.nonepic"
        value="var.bab@20"/>
        <variable-bonus targetid="combat.toHit"
        value="var.bab.nonepic"
        kind="bab"/>
        <variable-bonus targetid="combat.toHit"
        value="max(0, ($ranks.character-19) / 2)"
        kind="epic"/>

        I have uploaded the new tarball to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen-xml/files/playing.tgz


        I did a quick check and on my machine (2G Pentum with 768M of memory)
        running a loop of creating a 27th level Monk 50 times (dumping all output
        to /dev/null) gives the following timings:

        Client JVM: 100 seconds (2 seconds per iteration)
        Server JVM: 85 Seconds (1.75 seconds per iteration).

        --
        regards,
        Frugal
        -OS Chimp
      • andargor
        ... have ... level. ... memory) ... output ... I ll be out of town for a few days. I ll check it out when I get back. I admit I am uncomfortable with an @
        Message 3 of 28 , Jun 29, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Frugal" <frugal@p...> wrote:
          > I have added an extention to the variables in formulas. You can now
          have
          > <name>@<level> to give you the value of a variable at a certain
          level.
          > Then you can do certain things like:
          >
          > <variable-bonus targetid="var.bab.nonepic"
          > value="var.bab@20"/>
          > <variable-bonus targetid="combat.toHit"
          > value="var.bab.nonepic"
          > kind="bab"/>
          > <variable-bonus targetid="combat.toHit"
          > value="max(0, ($ranks.character-19) / 2)"
          > kind="epic"/>
          >
          > I have uploaded the new tarball to:
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen-xml/files/playing.tgz
          >
          >
          > I did a quick check and on my machine (2G Pentum with 768M of
          memory)
          > running a loop of creating a 27th level Monk 50 times (dumping all
          output
          > to /dev/null) gives the following timings:
          >
          > Client JVM: 100 seconds (2 seconds per iteration)
          > Server JVM: 85 Seconds (1.75 seconds per iteration).
          >
          > --
          > regards,
          > Frugal
          > -OS Chimp

          I'll be out of town for a few days. I'll check it out when I get back.

          I admit I am uncomfortable with an "@" sign in a variable name,
          because of XPath/XSLT (@ = attribute name). Could cause some
          confusion.

          Also, remember the "table" vs "formula" debate in the main PCGen
          group? I'm in the "table" camp :) Would there be a major problem if
          you simply used var.bab1, var.bab2, etc... instead of a formula?

          It's just that formulas don't fit sometimes... Sure, there's
          the "standard" progressions, but a publisher can easily go off the
          beaten path.

          I realize that sometimes you don't have a choice but to use a formula
          (e.g.: Epic bonuses), but for levels <= 20 I still think tables are
          better.

          On the performance side, that's surprisingly good. I haven't worked
          on my engine for a couple of weeks now, but the last benchmark was a
          25th level Barbarian which is generated in 1.6s (so ~80s for 50
          iterations, C++ XML manipulation with JS game system scripting)

          My turkish $0.02

          Andargor
        • Frugal
          ... I ran out of characters that could be used as in a variable and were not already used as mathematical syntax ;O) I guess that just
          Message 4 of 28 , Jun 29, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            <quote who="andargor">
            > --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Frugal" <frugal@p...> wrote:
            > I admit I am uncomfortable with an "@" sign in a variable name,
            > because of XPath/XSLT (@ = attribute name). Could cause some
            > confusion.

            I ran out of characters that could be used as in a variable and were not
            already used as mathematical syntax ;O)

            I guess that just having '.n' at the end of a variable to indicate might
            do. A better way would be to have a JEP function getvar(varname, level) to
            do it.

            Anyway, I am still not convinced that my way will work for all cases.

            > Also, remember the "table" vs "formula" debate in the main PCGen
            > group? I'm in the "table" camp :) Would there be a major problem if
            > you simply used var.bab1, var.bab2, etc... instead of a formula?

            Only because it would increase the number of variables by a factor of up
            to 20 ;O)

            > It's just that formulas don't fit sometimes... Sure, there's
            > the "standard" progressions, but a publisher can easily go off the
            > beaten path.

            Like the Monk unarmed damage tables...

            > I realize that sometimes you don't have a choice but to use a formula
            > (e.g.: Epic bonuses), but for levels <= 20 I still think tables are
            > better.
            >
            > On the performance side, that's surprisingly good. I haven't worked
            > on my engine for a couple of weeks now, but the last benchmark was a
            > 25th level Barbarian which is generated in 1.6s (so ~80s for 50
            > iterations, C++ XML manipulation with JS game system scripting)

            That is interesting. I get completely different results. Running
            panther.exe with the supplied configuration (Fighter4/Bard10) takes 3.7
            seconds including program startup.

            If I put the character creation stuff in a loop, and create the same
            character 10 times to offset any startup times I still get a loop time of
            3.7 seconds... Running the loop on a 27th level Monk gives me 6.8secs per
            loop

            I am using the following command line to ensure that all output goes to
            /dev/null so that the program is not slowed down by concolse display
            speeds:

            time /bin/yes | ./panther.exe 2&>1 > /dev/null

            What sort of spec machine are you running on?

            --
            regards,
            Frugal
            -OS Chimp
          • andargor
            ... (snip) ... (snip) ... time of ... 6.8secs per ... You using Cygwin or something like that? That command doesn t work for me, and I haven t made a makefile
            Message 5 of 28 , Jun 29, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Frugal" <frugal@p...> wrote:
              (snip)
              > > Also, remember the "table" vs "formula" debate in the main PCGen
              > > group? I'm in the "table" camp :) Would there be a major problem if
              > > you simply used var.bab1, var.bab2, etc... instead of a formula?
              >
              > Only because it would increase the number of variables by a factor of up
              > to 20 ;O)
              >
              (snip)
              > > It's just that formulas don't fit sometimes... Sure, there's
              > > the "standard" progressions, but a publisher can easily go off the
              > > beaten path.
              >
              > Like the Monk unarmed damage tables...
              >
              > > I realize that sometimes you don't have a choice but to use a formula
              > > (e.g.: Epic bonuses), but for levels <= 20 I still think tables are
              > > better.
              > >
              > > On the performance side, that's surprisingly good. I haven't worked
              > > on my engine for a couple of weeks now, but the last benchmark was a
              > > 25th level Barbarian which is generated in 1.6s (so ~80s for 50
              > > iterations, C++ XML manipulation with JS game system scripting)
              >
              > That is interesting. I get completely different results. Running
              > panther.exe with the supplied configuration (Fighter4/Bard10) takes 3.7
              > seconds including program startup.
              >
              > If I put the character creation stuff in a loop, and create the same
              > character 10 times to offset any startup times I still get a loop
              time of
              > 3.7 seconds... Running the loop on a 27th level Monk gives me
              6.8secs per
              > loop
              >
              > I am using the following command line to ensure that all output goes to
              > /dev/null so that the program is not slowed down by concolse display
              > speeds:
              >
              > time /bin/yes | ./panther.exe 2&>1 > /dev/null
              >
              > What sort of spec machine are you running on?
              >
              > --
              > regards,
              > Frugal
              > -OS Chimp

              You using Cygwin or something like that? That command doesn't work for
              me, and I haven't made a makefile for Linux yet.

              I've updated the file on my site with the latest version:

              http://www.andargor.com/files/panther-demo.zip

              I was testing in Debug mode, and the time is 1.6s for the 25th level
              Barbarian. Note that I haven't coded in all the special abilities for
              the classes.

              In Release mode, it's ~850 ms. Memory usage is 20MB (I cache the XML
              files in memory + JS engine which reserves stack/heap + some indexes).
              I have a 2.8 G P4 512 MB and it's built under Win2K (for now :)

              The total execution time like you calculate it, however, would include
              loading the XML files. If you look under SRD/scripts in main.js,
              you'll see that I calculate from before setting all the abilities,
              adding the race, adding the class levels and skill ranks. So your
              benchmark would depend on how fast you load the "database".

              Andargor
            • andargor
              Just before I forget, I have been trying to craft an XSLT to convert your XML dump of the PCGen data files into a more neutral version, that doesn t have any
              Message 6 of 28 , Jun 29, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Just before I forget, I have been trying to craft an XSLT to convert
                your XML dump of the PCGen data files into a more "neutral" version,
                that doesn't have any engine-specific stuff.

                Would it be a lot of trouble for you to make an export that doesn't
                have the nitty-gritty logic stuff in it or specific naming
                conventions? Like, for example:

                <feat id="Alertness">
                <name>Alertness</name>
                <type>General</type>
                <fighter_bonus>No</fighter_bonus>
                <multiple>No</multiple>
                <stack>No</stack>
                <prerequisite/>
                <grant>
                <bonus>
                <skill>
                <name>Listen</name>
                <value>2</value>
                <type>Unnamed</type>
                </skill>
                </bonus>
                <bonus>
                <skill>
                <name>Spot</name>
                <value>2</value>
                <type>Unnamed</type>
                </skill>
                </bonus>
                </grant>
                </feat>

                The reason I am asking is I think it would be great for data monkeys
                to have an easy format for data entry without depending on the current
                version of the engine, or for any particular engine for that matter.

                For example, I could take this XML snippet and associate a piece of
                code with it (say, "Alertness.js") which does the logic stuff. I can
                modify the XML very easily with XSLT to fit my engine, and you could
                do the same for yours.

                This way, we have a stable neutral representation of the publisher data...

                I would really like to have raw data to input into my engine for some
                more tests. If it's not too much trouble for you, it would avoid me
                having to reinvent your wheel... :)

                Andargor
              • Tir Gwaith
                Just to throw a wrench in, because I think there will NEVER be an non-engine specific format, truely.... Your example IS engine specific....
                Message 7 of 28 , Jun 30, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  Just to throw a wrench in, because I think there will NEVER be an 'non-engine specific' format, truely....
                   
                  Your example IS engine specific....  <fighter_bonus>No</fighter_bonus> in and of itself is engine specific...  Types of feats that are choosable as class adjuncts are many, and not just "Fighter."
                   
                  There is no "neutral" version, just the perception of one.  As a data monkey, I've learned to challenge what my assumptions are, since publishers will always find new and interesting ways of looking at the game.  And there won't ever be a stable version, because new rules will always be written. 
                   
                  I don't see the point in striving to make things separate from the interpretor.  To me that is like designing a language without taking the listener into account.
                   
                  Tir Gwaith
                  LST Chimp
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: andargor
                  Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 9:12 PM
                  Subject: [pcgen-xml] [Frugal] Converting the PCGen Data Files (WAS Re: (unknown))

                  Just before I forget, I have been trying to craft an XSLT to convert
                  your XML dump of the PCGen data files into a more "neutral" version,
                  that doesn't have any engine-specific stuff.

                  Would it be a lot of trouble for you to make an export that doesn't
                  have the nitty-gritty logic stuff in it or specific naming
                  conventions? Like, for example:

                  <feat id="Alertness">
                  <name>Alertness</name>
                  <type>General</type>
                  <fighter_bonus>No</fighter_bonus>
                  <multiple>No</multiple>
                  <stack>No</stack>
                  <prerequisite/>
                  <grant>
                    <bonus>
                     <skill>
                      <name>Listen</name>
                      <value>2</value>
                      <type>Unnamed</type>
                     </skill>
                    </bonus>
                    <bonus>
                     <skill>
                      <name>Spot</name>
                      <value>2</value>
                      <type>Unnamed</type>
                     </skill>
                    </bonus>
                  </grant>
                  </feat>

                  The reason I am asking is I think it would be great for data monkeys
                  to have an easy format for data entry without depending on the current
                  version of the engine, or for any particular engine for that matter.

                  For example, I could take this XML snippet and associate a piece of
                  code with it (say, "Alertness.js") which does the logic stuff. I can
                  modify the XML very easily with XSLT to fit my engine, and you could
                  do the same for yours.

                  This way, we have a stable neutral representation of the publisher data...

                  I would really like to have raw data to input into my engine for some
                  more tests. If it's not too much trouble for you, it would avoid me
                  having to reinvent your wheel... :)

                  Andargor
                • Frugal
                  ... I think that a neutral version of the data can be farily easily created. The problem the D20 is not the data, but the
                  Message 8 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    <quote who="Tir Gwaith">
                    > There is no "neutral" version, just the perception of one. As a data
                    > monkey, I've learned to challenge what my assumptions are, since
                    > publishers will always find new and interesting ways of looking at the
                    > game. And there won't ever be a stable version, because new rules will
                    > always be written.

                    I think that a 'neutral' version of the data can be farily easily created.
                    The problem the D20 is not the data, but the manipulation of the data.
                    Every time a company brings out a new rule the way the data is to be
                    manipulated needs to be changed. As you stated the problem is not the
                    data, but the extra rules that are always added.

                    As I see it encoding the rules can be done in 3 ways:
                    - The PCGen way: every thing is hard coded into the program, new rules
                    mean new code
                    - Put the rules in the data: As well as encoding the data, also encode a
                    scripting language to manipulate the data.
                    - Plugins: New rules get encoded as plugins that are loaded into the
                    program as needed. So a dataset would contain data and a list of plugins
                    that are required to manipulate the data.

                    --
                    regards,
                    Frugal
                    -OS Chimp
                  • Frugal
                    I have a certain set of requirements for a truely generic system. These ... I have a rough requirements document I keep adding to as I
                    Message 9 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      <quote who="Frugal">
                      I have a certain set of requirements for a truely generic system. These
                      > include (but are not limited to):
                      >
                      > - Support Core 3.0 characters
                      > - Support Core 3.5 characters
                      > - Support Epic Characters
                      > - Support Exclusive Skills (i.e. the complicated calculations
                      > for maxRanks)
                      > - Support Gestalt Characters (in many forms: Take highest of 2+ values;
                      > take sum of 2+ values; take mean of 2+ values);
                      > - Support Adding a race and class level at the same time (i.e. in our
                      > campaign the DM has decided that the player with the Astral Deva
                      > character gets a different XP progression, but goes up a level of
                      > Deva and a level of cleric at the same time).
                      > - Support floating point variables (i.e. Monk/Rogue BAB of 3.75/3.75
                      > would give a BAB of floor(3.75+3.75)=7 rather than
                      > floor(3.75)+floor(3.75)=6 )

                      I have a rough requirements document I keep adding to as I experiment. I
                      currently have 89 requirements and growing ;O)

                      --
                      regards,
                      Frugal
                      -OS Chimp
                    • David Finch
                      ... Could you not move to making more of the rules coded into loadable javascript?
                      Message 10 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Frugal wrote:
                        > As I see it encoding the rules can be done in 3 ways:
                        > - The PCGen way: every thing is hard coded into the program, new rules
                        > mean new code
                        > - Put the rules in the data: As well as encoding the data, also encode a
                        > scripting language to manipulate the data.
                        > - Plugins: New rules get encoded as plugins that are loaded into the
                        > program as needed. So a dataset would contain data and a list of plugins
                        > that are required to manipulate the data.

                        Could you not move to making more of the rules coded into loadable javascript?
                      • Frugal
                        ... That was option 2 ;O) -- regards, Frugal -OS Chimp
                        Message 11 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          <quote who="David Finch">
                          > Frugal wrote:
                          >> As I see it encoding the rules can be done in 3 ways:
                          >> - The PCGen way: every thing is hard coded into the program, new rules
                          >> mean new code
                          >> - Put the rules in the data: As well as encoding the data, also encode
                          >> a
                          >> scripting language to manipulate the data.
                          >> - Plugins: New rules get encoded as plugins that are loaded into the
                          >> program as needed. So a dataset would contain data and a list of
                          >> plugins
                          >> that are required to manipulate the data.
                          >
                          > Could you not move to making more of the rules coded into loadable
                          > javascript?

                          That was option 2 ;O)

                          --
                          regards,
                          Frugal
                          -OS Chimp
                        • David Finch
                          ... True. I kind of thought you meant adding some small scriptlets into tags. This would add to the completity. My vision of how it should work is a bit more
                          Message 12 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Frugal wrote:

                            > <quote who="David Finch">
                            >
                            >>Frugal wrote:
                            >>
                            >>>As I see it encoding the rules can be done in 3 ways:
                            >>> - The PCGen way: every thing is hard coded into the program, new rules
                            >>> mean new code
                            >>> - Put the rules in the data: As well as encoding the data, also encode
                            >>>a
                            >>> scripting language to manipulate the data.
                            >>> - Plugins: New rules get encoded as plugins that are loaded into the
                            >>> program as needed. So a dataset would contain data and a list of
                            >>>plugins
                            >>> that are required to manipulate the data.
                            >>
                            >>Could you not move to making more of the rules coded into loadable
                            >>javascript?
                            > That was option 2 ;O)

                            True. I kind of thought you meant adding some small 'scriptlets' into tags.
                            This would add to the completity.

                            My vision of how it should work is a bit more radical. Remove all the
                            character creation specific code from the program all together. Change the
                            LST/XML tags and java code with Javascript functions which are loaded to
                            do the work. This has the disadvatage that they are harder for
                            non-programmers but it would make modifications and updates simpler. (may
                            be a simpler type could be made for the non-programers).

                            To make this work there would be a fix data model of the character, this
                            would enforce only stuff like: there are N abilities, they must have a Name
                            and a Score and a Mod etc. Extra fields can be dynamically added but the
                            Display part of the app, would need specific Java(script) to display them
                            (for example see Mozilla). XML would be used only for the Character Sheet
                            data all other data would be in the Javascript files.
                          • Frugal
                            ... Have a look at the work andargor had been doing: http://www.andargor.com/files/panther-demo.zip -- regards, Frugal -OS Chimp
                            Message 13 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                            • 0 Attachment
                              <quote who="David Finch">
                              > My vision of how it should work is a bit more radical. Remove all the
                              > character creation specific code from the program all together. Change the
                              > LST/XML tags and java code with Javascript functions which are loaded to
                              > do the work. This has the disadvatage that they are harder for
                              > non-programmers but it would make modifications and updates simpler. (may
                              > be a simpler type could be made for the non-programers).

                              Have a look at the work andargor had been doing:

                              http://www.andargor.com/files/panther-demo.zip

                              --
                              regards,
                              Frugal
                              -OS Chimp
                            • David Finch
                              ... Very intresting, did this go any further or was it just a tech demo?
                              Message 14 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Frugal wrote:
                                > Have a look at the work andargor had been doing:
                                > http://www.andargor.com/files/panther-demo.zip

                                Very intresting, did this go any further or was it just a tech demo?
                              • Frugal
                                ... It is curently a tech demo in that this is as far as he has developed it over a couple of weeks. Like all of the tech demos there
                                Message 15 of 28 , Jul 1, 2004
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  <quote who="David Finch">
                                  > Frugal wrote:
                                  >> Have a look at the work andargor had been doing:
                                  >> http://www.andargor.com/files/panther-demo.zip
                                  >
                                  > Very intresting, did this go any further or was it just a tech demo?

                                  It is curently a tech demo in that this is as far as he has developed it
                                  over a couple of weeks.

                                  Like all of the tech demos there is a huge difference between handling the
                                  basics and handling the more complicated stuff ( I know that I keep
                                  hitting problems doing some of the more esoteric things).

                                  --
                                  regards,
                                  Frugal
                                  -OS Chimp
                                • andargor
                                  ... non-engine specific format, truely.... ... No in and of itself is engine specific... Types of feats that are choosable as
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Jul 4, 2004
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Tir Gwaith"
                                    <thoron-tir-gwaith@l...> wrote:
                                    > Just to throw a wrench in, because I think there will NEVER be an
                                    'non-engine specific' format, truely....
                                    >
                                    > Your example IS engine specific....
                                    <fighter_bonus>No</fighter_bonus> in and of itself is engine
                                    specific... Types of feats that are choosable as class adjuncts are
                                    many, and not just "Fighter."
                                    >
                                    > There is no "neutral" version, just the perception of one. As a
                                    data monkey, I've learned to challenge what my assumptions are, since
                                    publishers will always find new and interesting ways of looking at the
                                    game. And there won't ever be a stable version, because new rules
                                    will always be written.
                                    >
                                    > I don't see the point in striving to make things separate from the
                                    interpretor. To me that is like designing a language without taking
                                    the listener into account.
                                    >
                                    > Tir Gwaith
                                    > LST Chimp

                                    Nice wrench. :)

                                    I don't want ot discuss semantics, but the example I gave is not
                                    specific to any engine. For example, I do not plan to use the
                                    fighter_bonus tag in my program and I doubt Frugal or PCGen will ever
                                    use it.

                                    The point is to use XML for what it is intended for: tagging data,
                                    nothing more, nothing less. It is a machine readable version of
                                    publisher data, that's all.

                                    fighter_bonus gets transformed into engine specific tags:
                                    <bonus><type>Fighter</type></bonus> or <bonus id="Alterness"
                                    type="fighter.bonus"> or even TYPE:General.Fighter if you want to
                                    regenerate LST. You use XSLT to do that.

                                    The marvelous thing is that you only coded the publisher data once.
                                    All you have to do is maintain a transform (XSLT). Ain't that sweet?

                                    Andargor
                                  • andargor
                                    ... handling the ... Yes, it s only a demo as I m experimenting with the various options Frugal described for the logic and rules portion of the problem. I
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Jul 4, 2004
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Frugal" <frugal@p...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > <quote who="David Finch">
                                      > > Frugal wrote:
                                      > >> Have a look at the work andargor had been doing:
                                      > >> http://www.andargor.com/files/panther-demo.zip
                                      > >
                                      > > Very intresting, did this go any further or was it just a tech demo?
                                      >
                                      > It is curently a tech demo in that this is as far as he has developed it
                                      > over a couple of weeks.
                                      >
                                      > Like all of the tech demos there is a huge difference between
                                      handling the
                                      > basics and handling the more complicated stuff ( I know that I keep
                                      > hitting problems doing some of the more esoteric things).
                                      >
                                      > --
                                      > regards,
                                      > Frugal
                                      > -OS Chimp

                                      Yes, it's only a demo as I'm experimenting with the various options
                                      Frugal described for the "logic" and "rules" portion of the problem.

                                      I tend to favor "option 3":

                                      - use a neutral version of the base data which isn't egine specific
                                      (enter data once, use many times)
                                      - Transform data into an engine specific format (Frugal's, mine,
                                      Engine XYZ) using XSLT
                                      - Have scriptlets that hook in to provide the rules aspect (I use the
                                      term "scriptlets" to denote small bits of code in the engine's
                                      preferred language: javascript, python, perl, whatever)

                                      The reason that I like this approach is that you don't have to agree
                                      on a very specific format for the neutral base data. It can be very
                                      loose, like I described. As well, option 2 is still too close to
                                      engine specific code, since everyone would have to agree on a language
                                      and an API.

                                      On the maintenance side, as publisher data is released you don't need
                                      developer-grade people to code in loose XML. There are a lot of people
                                      out there that are willing to help but that don't know LST,
                                      javascript, etc. So their task would be to enter the base data using
                                      guidelines. Sure a schema or DTD could be used, but we would have to
                                      agree on it, which is no mean task.

                                      The rules or logic portion would be then the responsibility of the
                                      developer-grade people for each engine. You distribute the workload,
                                      and you remove the engine dependency from the base data if an engine
                                      gets updated.

                                      My general philosophy is that we should minimize the requirements for
                                      standards, since that is what has stopped XML projects in the past.
                                      Everyone has his/her own view of how the XML data should be
                                      structured, and arguments. Let's just get something that can be
                                      machine readable and reused out there. The "small steps" theory.

                                      Frugal, is it possible for you to do a "neutral" dump as I described
                                      if it's not too much trouble? It would allow me to demonstrate what I
                                      mean. I could even craft an XSLT that would format the neutral data
                                      into one compatible with your engine (as much as possible). It would
                                      be much appreciated :)

                                      If you don't have the time, could you upload your LST parser so I can
                                      fiddle with it?

                                      Andargor
                                    • Paul M. Lambert
                                      ... I ve been reading this discussion and I d like to make sure I understand what you mean, andargor. Tell me what below matches your thoughts and what
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Jul 4, 2004
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        On Sun, 04 Jul 2004, andargor wrote:

                                        > Nice wrench. :)
                                        >
                                        > I don't want ot discuss semantics, but the example I gave is not
                                        > specific to any engine. For example, I do not plan to use the
                                        > fighter_bonus tag in my program and I doubt Frugal or PCGen will ever
                                        > use it.
                                        >
                                        > The point is to use XML for what it is intended for: tagging data,
                                        > nothing more, nothing less. It is a machine readable version of
                                        > publisher data, that's all.
                                        >
                                        > fighter_bonus gets transformed into engine specific tags:
                                        > <bonus><type>Fighter</type></bonus> or <bonus id="Alterness"
                                        > type="fighter.bonus"> or even TYPE:General.Fighter if you want to
                                        > regenerate LST. You use XSLT to do that.
                                        >
                                        > The marvelous thing is that you only coded the publisher data once.
                                        > All you have to do is maintain a transform (XSLT). Ain't that sweet?
                                        >
                                        > Andargor

                                        I've been reading this discussion and I'd like to make sure I understand
                                        what you mean, andargor.

                                        Tell me what below matches your thoughts and what doesn't, so we can get
                                        on the same page. Then I'll be able to tell if I actually agree with
                                        you. :-)

                                        As I see it your "data neutral" format idea could be re-expressed as a
                                        high level pseudo language. This language could then be converted into
                                        a given engine's native format (LST, PCGEN-XML--whatever that is,
                                        "plambertgen", whatever) if someone writes such a converter. And then the
                                        engine can handle that data as it sees fit.

                                        I see this to mean that the data neutral format would allow tag
                                        (re-)definitions, so, for example, <figher_bonus> could be a tag
                                        used in one data file, and it might be definied in coarser game
                                        terms in another. This would allow "libraries" of definitions for
                                        a given game system or rule set that would allow easy mapping to
                                        specific engines in the converters.

                                        I'm trying to think of a concrete example. Perhaps something like:

                                        <str>7</str>

                                        in a character definition for a 3.5 SRD character. And in the
                                        library data file for 3.5 SRD, you might have:

                                        <character>
                                        ...
                                        <attribute>
                                        <name>Strength</name>
                                        <abbr>STR</abbr>
                                        <tag>str</tag>
                                        <description>Physical strength and prowess</description>
                                        ...
                                        </attribute>
                                        ...
                                        </character>

                                        These are extremely rough non-scaling examples, of course, and not
                                        necessarily how I actually suggest doing attributes, but anyway...

                                        A converter then might take that information and turn it into LST data.
                                        The converter would know the limits of its target format. For example,
                                        if it's not possible to actually change/rename/add attributes in LST
                                        format, it would basically know to ignore the attribute definitions and
                                        use the ones inherent to the engine. If another were used, it could
                                        generate a warning or error.

                                        A converter might even have full internal knowledge of a given "library"
                                        as well, if it was a good choice for the coder/engine/etc. For example,
                                        an engine extremely specific to a certain game rule set (maybe an SRD3.5
                                        only web character repository, or whatever) could ignore the library
                                        entirely, since the author would know what was and wasn't defined in
                                        there.

                                        This would mean the libraries and the converters could be maintained by
                                        people with strong such skills, while the casual user who just wants to
                                        say "I'd like to add a Bow of Tumultuous Angst to my equipment lists;
                                        it's a Long Bow that gives +2/+4 only to Chaotic Neutral wielders."
                                        could do it with dirt-simple, straightforward tags. Still valid XML, but
                                        really simple tags whose inner workings are defined elsewhere, out of
                                        sight.

                                        However, if they want it to give the wielder +1 to hit for each pound of
                                        bat guano they're carrying, they'll need to dig deeper. But simple
                                        things will be easy and complex things will be possible. Right?

                                        Please let me know where I misunderstand.

                                        --plambert
                                      • andargor
                                        Answers inline. ... (snip) ... then the ... You sure think ahead :) Actually, what I propose is more basic: just convert publisher data into a machine readable
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Jul 4, 2004
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Answers inline.

                                          --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Paul M. Lambert" <plambert@p...> wrote:
                                          (snip)
                                          > As I see it your "data neutral" format idea could be re-expressed as a
                                          > high level pseudo language. This language could then be converted into
                                          > a given engine's native format (LST, PCGEN-XML--whatever that is,
                                          > "plambertgen", whatever) if someone writes such a converter. And
                                          then the
                                          > engine can handle that data as it sees fit.
                                          >
                                          > I see this to mean that the data neutral format would allow tag
                                          > (re-)definitions, so, for example, <figher_bonus> could be a tag
                                          > used in one data file, and it might be definied in coarser game
                                          > terms in another. This would allow "libraries" of definitions for
                                          > a given game system or rule set that would allow easy mapping to
                                          > specific engines in the converters.


                                          You sure think ahead :)

                                          Actually, what I propose is more basic: just convert publisher data
                                          into a machine readable format with a minimum of context (i.e. XML
                                          tags) so that it can be manipulated. Your library concept could then
                                          be implemented, if you wish to do so. First things first :)

                                          (snip)
                                          > This would mean the libraries and the converters could be maintained by
                                          > people with strong such skills, while the casual user who just wants to
                                          > say "I'd like to add a Bow of Tumultuous Angst to my equipment lists;
                                          > it's a Long Bow that gives +2/+4 only to Chaotic Neutral wielders."
                                          > could do it with dirt-simple, straightforward tags. Still valid
                                          XML, but
                                          > really simple tags whose inner workings are defined elsewhere, out of
                                          > sight.


                                          Yes, the general idea is to leverage the large quantity of people that
                                          have the willingess to help but not necessarily the coding skills.
                                          They could describe that bow very simply, and fill in the logic
                                          portion as a description. Someone with coding skills could then craft
                                          an engine specific XSLT and translate the logic into engine-specific
                                          "scriptlets" for a particular tool.

                                          Andargor
                                        • Frugal
                                          ... The LST parser is already up on the groups file section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen-xml/files/sample_source-20031216.tgz As
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Jul 5, 2004
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            <quote who="andargor">

                                            > Frugal, is it possible for you to do a "neutral" dump as I described
                                            > if it's not too much trouble? It would allow me to demonstrate what I
                                            > mean. I could even craft an XSLT that would format the neutral data
                                            > into one compatible with your engine (as much as possible). It would
                                            > be much appreciated :)
                                            >
                                            > If you don't have the time, could you upload your LST parser so I can
                                            > fiddle with it?

                                            The LST parser is already up on the groups file section:

                                            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen-xml/files/sample_source-20031216.tgz

                                            As the date indicates this has not been worked on since the middle of
                                            december. Be warned: "here be kludges".

                                            Feel free to do with it as you will, There should be a GPL header at the
                                            top of each file ;O)

                                            --
                                            regards,
                                            Frugal
                                            -OS Chimp
                                          • David Finch
                                            ... A first good step would be that the data had been input. If the logic has been typed in english then at least when the conversion to PCgen format is done
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Jul 5, 2004
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              andargor wrote:
                                              > Yes, the general idea is to leverage the large quantity of people that
                                              > have the willingess to help but not necessarily the coding skills.
                                              > They could describe that bow very simply, and fill in the logic
                                              > portion as a description. Someone with coding skills could then craft
                                              > an engine specific XSLT and translate the logic into engine-specific
                                              > "scriptlets" for a particular tool.

                                              A first good step would be that the data had been input. If the logic has
                                              been typed in english then at least when the conversion to PCgen format is
                                              done someone can go though at 'specialise it' to PCgen format. This has the
                                              added advatage that someone can check that the english logic matches the
                                              real programming logic.
                                            • andargor
                                              ... 20031216.tgz ... of ... at the ... Yikes! There be kludges :) Well, I had to craft an Ant build.xml, and it seems to compile properly... What version of
                                              Message 22 of 28 , Jul 6, 2004
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Frugal" <frugal@p...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > The LST parser is already up on the groups file section:
                                                >
                                                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen-xml/files/sample_source-
                                                20031216.tgz
                                                >
                                                > As the date indicates this has not been worked on since the middle
                                                of
                                                > december. Be warned: "here be kludges".
                                                >
                                                > Feel free to do with it as you will, There should be a GPL header
                                                at the
                                                > top of each file ;O)
                                                >
                                                > --
                                                > regards,
                                                > Frugal
                                                > -OS Chimp

                                                Yikes! There be kludges :)

                                                Well, I had to craft an Ant build.xml, and it seems to compile
                                                properly...

                                                What version of the data files were you using? The parser is croaking
                                                on several of the 5.7.2 ones.

                                                Andargor
                                              • Frugal
                                                ... Oh, yeah, oops. I was using Eclipse and it managed all of the building for me ;O) ... I was using the CVS data as of the date of the
                                                Message 23 of 28 , Jul 6, 2004
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  <quote who="andargor">
                                                  > --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Frugal" <frugal@p...> wrote:
                                                  >>
                                                  >> The LST parser is already up on the groups file section:
                                                  >>
                                                  >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen-xml/files/sample_source-
                                                  > 20031216.tgz
                                                  >>
                                                  >> As the date indicates this has not been worked on since the middle
                                                  > of
                                                  >> december. Be warned: "here be kludges".
                                                  >>
                                                  >> Feel free to do with it as you will, There should be a GPL header
                                                  > at the
                                                  >> top of each file ;O)
                                                  >
                                                  > Yikes! There be kludges :)
                                                  >
                                                  > Well, I had to craft an Ant build.xml, and it seems to compile
                                                  > properly...

                                                  Oh, yeah, oops. I was using Eclipse and it managed all of the building for
                                                  me ;O)

                                                  > What version of the data files were you using? The parser is croaking
                                                  > on several of the 5.7.2 ones.

                                                  I was using the CVS data as of the date of the archive. So any new tags
                                                  will fail.

                                                  IT would be so nice if every time someone messed around with a data tag
                                                  they were forced to increment the LST version number. It would make data
                                                  management a lot easier if you could state which version of LST syntax
                                                  your LST files were.

                                                  --
                                                  regards,
                                                  Frugal
                                                  -OS Chimp
                                                • andargor
                                                  ... tag ... data ... syntax ... Or if the data were in XML and the rule logic described somewhere for PCGen, the LST could be regenerated with each new version
                                                  Message 24 of 28 , Jul 6, 2004
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    --- In pcgen-xml@yahoogroups.com, "Frugal" <frugal@p...> wrote:
                                                    >
                                                    > IT would be so nice if every time someone messed around with a data
                                                    tag
                                                    > they were forced to increment the LST version number. It would make
                                                    data
                                                    > management a lot easier if you could state which version of LST
                                                    syntax
                                                    > your LST files were.
                                                    >
                                                    > --
                                                    > regards,
                                                    > Frugal
                                                    > -OS Chimp

                                                    Or if the data were in XML and the rule logic described somewhere for
                                                    PCGen, the LST could be regenerated with each new version ;)

                                                    Andargor
                                                  • Mark Coletti
                                                    On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:55:51 +0100 (BST), Frugal ... It was put the rules in the data that did it for me. What you re talking about is really a knowledge
                                                    Message 25 of 28 , Jul 14, 2004
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:55:51 +0100 (BST), Frugal
                                                      <frugal@...> wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > <quote who="Tir Gwaith">
                                                      > > There is no "neutral" version, just the perception of one. [...] there won't
                                                      > > ever be a stable version, because new rules will
                                                      > > always be written.

                                                      > I think that a 'neutral' version of the data can be farily easily created.
                                                      > The problem the D20 is not the data, but the manipulation of the data.
                                                      > Every time a company brings out a new rule the way the data is to be
                                                      > manipulated needs to be changed. As you stated the problem is not the
                                                      > data, but the extra rules that are always added.

                                                      > As I see it encoding the rules can be done in 3 ways:
                                                      > - The PCGen way: every thing is hard coded into the program, new rules
                                                      > mean new code
                                                      > - Put the rules in the data: As well as encoding the data, also encode a
                                                      > scripting language to manipulate the data.
                                                      > - Plugins: New rules get encoded as plugins that are loaded into the
                                                      > program as needed. So a dataset would contain data and a list of plugins
                                                      > that are required to manipulate the data.

                                                      It was "put the rules in the data" that did it for me. What you're
                                                      talking about is really a knowledge base; which makes sense in that
                                                      PCGen *is* essentially an expert system that relies on a
                                                      knowledge-base containing rules for various d20 based gaming systems.
                                                      The problem is that most of the knowledge is either hard-coded in Java
                                                      or in LST files, and most of the "inferencing" for the huge cloud of
                                                      rules is also hard-coded. (Think IF-THEN and SWITCH statements as a
                                                      crude sort of linear, data-driven 'inferencing'.)

                                                      JESS is a free, open-source, expert system implemented in Java. I can
                                                      easily see where most of the PCGen "knowledge-base" currently spread
                                                      among Java and LST files could be rolled into a knowledge-base
                                                      containing explicit rules. Specific systems would just add new
                                                      knowledge-bases that contain fresh sets of rules (including some that
                                                      may remove or modify existing ones).

                                                      A JESS (or similar system) based PCGen system would be inherently
                                                      smaller since the brunt of the inferencing will be left to the
                                                      inference engine, and the rules would be explicitly codified as, well,
                                                      rules. You could also set up the knowledge-base such that you can
                                                      generate explanations. One thing about the d20 systems is that
                                                      they're very complex once you consider all the different rules and
                                                      their respective interactions. If, say, a character has an 18 AC, it
                                                      might be nice to know *how* and *why* it's currently 18. All the
                                                      rules that trigger AC mods could contribute to explanatory text. "AC
                                                      base 10, +2 for Dexterity, +3 for ring of nimbleness, +3 to <mumble>
                                                      spell effect."

                                                      Of course this is all pie-in-the-sky ramblings implementing JESS in
                                                      PCGen would entail quite a bit of work. (Um, I think.) But, what the
                                                      hell, it makes for a pleasant gedankenexperiment. %-)

                                                      More info:

                                                      http://web.njit.edu/all_topics/Prog_Lang_Docs/html/jess51/

                                                      Cheers!

                                                      MAC
                                                      --
                                                      I'm taking reality in small doses to build immunity.
                                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.