>From: David Fotland <fotland@...>
>I use PL[W] in the root node if white is to play first.
Agree. For completeness you could use PL[B] in the other case, but I think
everybody will default to B if no player is specified (Arno: is it
specified in the standard whose turn it is to play by default after a setup
>I use TE (nonstandard, please don't kill me :) to mark
>a correct solution node. I used to use TE, but now I translate
>that automatically to "Very Good Move", so I wanted something different.
>I'm open to suggestions here. It's easy to change for a few months.
>Maybe I should go back to using TE? That's what the current shipping
>version of Many Faces uses if you create a problem.
TE will break everyone else's code I'm afraid. I just use TE for good
move. I consider that the most natural :)
One strange thing I noticed in your problems is that you mark not only the
winning side's moves by TE, but also the losing side's moves. However,
these moves are usually bad ones. So if anything they should be marked as
>An sgf problem set for me is just a collection of sgf game trees concatenated
>into a single file.
I find it messy to have hundreds or thousands of tiny games. So I usually
put a reasonable amount of problems into the same tree. That way you can
structure problems e.g. 10 at a time. Example:
(;C[nodes 3..10 omitted to save space]))
; C[rest omitted to save space]
>From: Jens Yllman <jens.yllman@...>
>> I just have some thoughts about how to make and handle problem sets with
>>SGF. What I mean is SGF files that starts with some AB and AW to set up
A setup property such as AB or AW does not need to be in the root node. You
can set up many problems within the same file. See the example above.
>> The other thing is that problems is often local. Do you only want to
>>diplay the relevant portion of the board. How's the best way to do that?
>>And how do the normal programs handle that?
If you want you can use the view property:
Usually I find it too bothersome to set this up. People can find the
problem on the board without trouble. If it is embedded in a messy full
board situation, you can mark some stones or groups and then give a comment
such as C[How can B capture/connect/save/attack/etc. the marked stones?]
>> I'm just looking for a good way to build problem sets for training. I'm
>>also working on some go programs. And I'm thinking of making a problem
>>training module. But I don't know if I'm to use SGF or make my own format.
>>If anyone has some good experience with SGF and problem sets let me know.
I have had good experiences with using SGF for problem sets.