[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

Computer-friendly Nactation methodology for variant/family symbols

Posted By: Matt Ryder
Date: Sunday, 6 February 2011, at 2:38 p.m.

In Response To: Computer-friendly Nactation methodology for variant/family symbols (Nack Ballard)

It is more elegant and more compact to describe a play with a single character, and I believe that should be the mainstream form of Nactation.

I'd agree if only one character was involved. On this forum, those rare plays require formatting tags <> that add 7 characters. In a word processor, extra keystrokes or mouse moves are required to italicize, embolden and underline. I concur that it's more compact though :-) Still I can see I'm fighting a losing battle, so I should point out that although this one character requirement may hamper efforts in certain plain-text computer contexts, it's nothing that can't be worked around with a little house-keeping (as Storm correctly notes). I intend to attempt a trad to nactation conversion routine whatever boulders you place in my path :-)

(though I was a bit surprised you didn't jump on the opportunity to practice by participating in the recent Nactation Study).

Alas, I was moving house and didn't have access to the internet. I plan to do some catch-up homework… :-)

Regarding the "21S-11 [E H31]," I believe Kye merely went to bgonline.org and misclicked on 21$-11, which does show [E H31] for that reply.

Ah, mystery solved.

I'm not sure what solution you are hoping will present itself for nacbrac'ing data that is charted in traditional data form (such as Tom's large compilation).

My (sadly utopian) idea was this:
1. Hand-nactate Tom's archive so that each trad move has a nactation equivalent associated with it.
2. Split Kye's nacbrac strings (programmatically) into groups of nactation symbols for each reply.
3. Use a simple database (SQL) query to join the nactation symbol in 1. with the corresponding nactation symbol in 2. , allowing the unioned record to be updated with the newer equities

This probably won't work though because of the multiple nactation option mismatches you consider to be "an advantage". Still, I'll soldier on quixotically :-) Maybe I'll learn some nactation tricks in the interim :-)

If e, f, E and P are fed to the computer, then even IF the program finds an underlined letter indistinguishable (do we know that for sure?)

You can make a computer distinguish font-styles. You can make it jump through fiery hoops singing the star-spangled banner. You can make it do really anything you like. Just with potentially a little more travail.

E is not the fifth member of the E family; rather, it is the first member of the E family.

I look forward to the updated guide with mounting eagerness.

Matt

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.