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

Re: Just some thoughts.

Expand Messages
  • mueller@xxx.xx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
    ... 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
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 25, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      >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
      property?)


      >I use TE[3] (nonstandard, please don't kill me :) to mark
      >a correct solution node. I used to use TE[2], 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[2]? That's what the current shipping
      >version of Many Faces uses if you create a problem.

      TE[3] will break everyone else's code I'm afraid. I just use TE[1] 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
      BM[1].

      >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:

      (;GM[1]SZ[19]DT[1998-03-23]FF[3]GN[Fuseki Test]
      (;N[1-10]
      (;N[1]AB[pd][jd][fq][qp]AW[dc][ci][dn][dp]
      (;B[pj]N[7])
      (;B[kq]N[10])
      (;B[ei]N[5])
      (;B[ce]N[5]))
      (;N[2]AW[dc][ce][dn][dp]AB[fq][pq][qk][pd]
      (;B[jd]N[6])
      (;B[pg]N[5])
      (;B[jp]N[10])
      (;B[cj]N[5]))
      (;C[nodes 3..10 omitted to save space]))
      (;N[11-20]
      (;N[11]AW[dc][cd][ck][dp][fq][qj]AB[cf][ci][oq][qp][ql][pd]
      (;B[jc]N[7])
      (;B[jp]N[8])
      (;B[qg]N[10])
      (;B[ei]N[6]))
      (;N[12]AW[dc][ce][jc][qj][cp][do]AB[pd][qp][op][eq][cm][cj]
      (;B[lc]N[7])
      (;B[jq]N[8])
      (;B[cr]N[10])
      (;B[cg]N[6]))
      )
      ; 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 position.

      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:
      http://www.sbox.tu-graz.ac.at/home/h/hollosi/sgf/DD_VW.html
      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.

      Happy holidays!

      Martin
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.