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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 8 , Apr 4, 2004
    • 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 2 of 8 , Apr 4, 2004
      • 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 3 of 8 , Apr 6, 2004
        • 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.