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

RE: [sgf-std] "Long" property names?

Expand Messages
  • Denis Lambot
    As others said, the problem with custom properties is that they can become a problem when the specification are extended with new properties. So there is
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 4 10:55 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      As others said, the problem with custom properties is that they can become a problem when the specification are extended with new properties. So there is always the possibility of a clash between the existing custom properties and the new one.
       
      To solve this problem, may I suggest a practice which is common in Internet protocol for custom properties (e.g. in SMPT Mail header, MIME type, and some others). The idea is to prefix the custom properties with "X-". This prefix is reserved for custom properties and new version of the specification never use "X-" for new properties.
       
      We can further take the convention to have "X-<APPNAME>-<TAG>. So for the KGS custom properties this would be X-KGS-DE, X-KGS-SB, ...
       
      -----Message d'origine-----
      De : Rui Jiang [mailto:ruijiang2000@...]
      Envoyé : samedi 3 avril 2004 06:06
      À : sgf-std@yahoogroups.com
      Objet : Re: [sgf-std] "Long" property names?

      MultiGo is OK with arbitary length tag id. So I am fine with long property names. I would suggest we agree on leaving length 2 tags as reserved tags for SGF standard (total 676),  and any extension should be longer than 2, maybe follow the convention like:
       
      <APPNAME><TAGID>
       
      as you are going to use.
       
      So far I have tested:
       
      WinMGT: OK
      gGo: OK
      JagoClient: OK
      Go Assistant: OK
       
      But maybe some other older applications might break.  
       
    • William M. Shubert
      The problem is, Denis, that - is not allowed in SGF properties, so this will beak all existing FF[4] sgf applications. I think that anything we do *must*
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 4 12:12 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        The problem is, Denis, that "-" is not allowed in SGF properties, so
        this will beak all existing FF[4] sgf applications. I think that
        anything we do *must* work on FF[4] parsers that follow the spec,
        otherwise we are making up our own non-backward-compatible standard
        instead.

        I was even more cautious than this, wanting to avoid KGSXX properties if
        other apps didn't accept them (since, although they are fine by the
        FF[4] spec, they are quite different from all the standard properties).
        As it happens, the only app so far that doesn't accept them is my very
        own CGoban 1! I don't mind that so much, people still use it but it
        wouldn't be hard to fix in this case.

        On Sun, 2004-04-04 at 10:55, Denis Lambot wrote:
        > As others said, the problem with custom properties is that they can
        > become a problem when the specification are extended with new
        > properties. So there is always the possibility of a clash between the
        > existing custom properties and the new one.
        >
        > To solve this problem, may I suggest a practice which is common in
        > Internet protocol for custom properties (e.g. in SMPT Mail header,
        > MIME type, and some others). The idea is to prefix the custom
        > properties with "X-". This prefix is reserved for custom properties
        > and new version of the specification never use "X-" for new
        > properties.
        >
        > We can further take the convention to have "X-<APPNAME>-<TAG>. So for
        > the KGS custom properties this would be X-KGS-DE, X-KGS-SB, ...
        >
        > -----Message d'origine-----
        > De : Rui Jiang [mailto:ruijiang2000@...]
        > Envoyé : samedi 3 avril 2004 06:06
        > À : sgf-std@yahoogroups.com
        > Objet : Re: [sgf-std] "Long" property names?
        >
        >
        > MultiGo is OK with arbitary length tag id. So I am fine with long
        > property names. I would suggest we agree on leaving length 2 tags as
        > reserved tags for SGF standard (total 676), and any extension should
        > be longer than 2, maybe follow the convention like:
        >
        > <APPNAME><TAGID>
        >
        > as you are going to use.
        >
        > So far I have tested:
        >
        > WinMGT: OK
        > gGo: OK
        > JagoClient: OK
        > Go Assistant: OK
        >
        > But maybe some other older applications might break.
        * Bill Shubert (wms@...)
      • Rui Jiang
        Yeah, - won t work. But I like the X prefix. ... From: William M. Shubert To: sgf-std@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 12:12 PM Subject: RE:
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 4 8:16 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Yeah, "-" won't work. But I like the "X" prefix.
           
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 12:12 PM
          Subject: RE: [sgf-std] "Long" property names?

        • Arno Hollosi
          ... I use it :-) Speaking about old SGF programs: personally I would not mind at all, if long property names broke old SGF applications. It would lead to
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 6 12:43 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            William M. Shubert wrote:
            > I was even more cautious than this, wanting to avoid KGSXX properties if
            > other apps didn't accept them (since, although they are fine by the
            > FF[4] spec, they are quite different from all the standard properties).
            > As it happens, the only app so far that doesn't accept them is my very
            > own CGoban 1!

            I use it :-)

            Speaking about old SGF programs: personally I would not mind at all, if
            long property names broke old SGF applications. It would lead to people
            updating their applications (which have fewer bugs - I hope). Of course,
            you would have to take some heat, Bill.

            Go ahead and use long property names. SGFC has an artificial limit at
            about 100 letters for property names :-)

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