|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 905 OF 914 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Nov-30-20
 | | Phony Benoni: Now that everyone is assembled here, maybe I can ask a question that's on my mind. In the example given on PGN Upload Utility, the player names are giving in the order "Last, First". Because of that, I've always submitted games with the names in that order. But when I see PGN posted by others, it invariably seems names are given as "First Last". This order also appears on games downloaded from <CG>. Have I been doing it wrong all along? Or does it matter? (Doing it "Last, First" hasn't seemed to affect anything so far, and nobody has asked me to stop.) |
|
Nov-30-20
 | | jessicafischerqueen:
<Phony Name Order> At cg.com, both the <Upload Utility> and <pgn processor> will accept both versions of name order. No matter which order you put the names in, they will be published. That said- <zanzibar> thinks that we should all be using the <last name first, first name last> convention. Here is his post on the topic:
Biographer Bistro (kibitz #21421) |
|
Dec-01-20
| | Phony Benoni: Well, that makes me happy, both as a librarian and a person who grew up quoting the Bible: Matthew 20:16: <"So the last shall be first, and the first last.."> In fact, I am tempted to start making White "Last, First" and Black "First Last", just for the heck of it. Get thee behind me, Satan. |
|
Dec-01-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<PB 109- the John Kennedy War Movie> Well put.
Speaking as someone who has pretended to skim the Cliff Notes to <Hegel's> philosophy of history, I can confirm with some considerable assurance that the worm will inevitably turn. |
|
Dec-01-20
 | | Stonehenge: <Upload Utility will accept both versions of name order.> I don't think so, unless it has been changed.
I have a <Process Submissions> button, but it doesn't work for me. |
|
Dec-01-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<Stony>
If your <Process submissions> button doesn't work, that probably means at the present time you have not been selected to beta test that function. If you have been selected, you should already know that for sure, because <Steve> would have told you by email. If he did say you are beta testing that function, then you should let him know your button isn't working. It's possible there is a glitch or some "sticky code." The code on that function was not at all stable for some time- at first, I had to refresh the page constantly to get the buttons and submission boxes to work properly. I told <Steve> about that, and several days later the coding became very stable and reliable. And much faster as well. I don't know who has been selected for <processing pgn submission> beta testing except for myself. I have not asked <Steve> if anyone else is doing it at present. I know that you and I have been selected for <correction slip processing.> ==================
It's possible that the <Upload Utility> didn't accept pgns with both name orders in the past, but I can tell you it does now. You can test this for yourself easily enough. When you have two new pgns to upload, submit one to the <Upload Utility> with the names <first/last>, and the other with the names <last/first>. You will find that neither pgn will be rejected by the <upload utility>. If the utility rejects a submission, you will know easily enough because it will tell you with CAP LOCK RED INK LETTERS. Rather alarming in fact. But at the present time, the <Upload Utility> will indeed accept both of your submissions, and they will both appear in your <in box> under your name on the editing page. You will be able to see them just sitting there, like the Teamster's pension fund. I will also see them. If I process them, no matter which order the names are in, the pgn will publish normally in the database. I know this for a fact because I have been publishing games for a few weeks now, and some of the submitted pgns have <first/last> name order and some have <last/first> name order. |
|
Dec-01-20
| | Stonehenge: Golly.
Do I have to wear a <submissive, don't work> button now? Please tell me I don't. Buttons are so Seventies. |
|
Dec-01-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<Henge> heh...
I don't think so.
I can only speak for myself, but I was thrilled to see you enlisted as a beta tester for the corrections slips. I imagine <Steve> is thrilled as well, given that you have already cut a wide swath in the 15 year-old, thousand slip back log. I estimate you have processed art least a quarter of the back log now? The games submission back log was tiny by comparison. Many of them were not publishable for one. You will remember a few examples I asked about in public last week. At present it only takes a few minutes a day to examine new pgn submissions and process them. It is rare to see more than 30 submissions per day, and they are almost all coming from the same 5 people. These 5 are among the most meticulous, reliable pgn creators in existence, which means I don't have to do much- or any- editing before processing. In fact, I have ample time to contact uploaders to let them know about mistakes in their pgn submissions. I would prefer to let folks know what formatting our "machine" will accept or not, so that I don't have to do as much editing. ==========
Anyways I expect <Steve> will produce updates for the editing page functions in the new future. He will lean heavily on you for feedback on the correction slips, I am certain. |
|
Dec-01-20
| | Stonehenge: It feels great to finally get some stuff done.
I was glad the system recognized Karlheinz Podzielny and Georg Maier as being new players. And not Karl-Heinz Podzielny and Georg Maier. |
|
Dec-01-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<Stony> Outstanding! Did they add buttons to the slip template so we can create new players who have names identical to one already in the database? Or did you find a workaround? I need to make a new Boris Shapiro . Not immediately though. I have to find the pgns for the New Boris first. I know I put them somewhere because I ran across them today. This by no means guarantees that I'll be able to find them tomorrow... ##########
Off topic have you seen this name? It's a monster! Edward Nathan Frankenstein Leonard Frankenstein |
|
Dec-01-20
| | Stonehenge: I didn't do anything special.
In Podzielny's case the names are slightly different. Daniel used to have a program that assumed they were the same player. Rather ridiculous, but he changed it somewhat after a complaint by me. Same of course in Maier's case. Now the system looks at the year the game was played in and knows it couldn't have been Georg Maier. |
|
Dec-01-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<Stonehenge>
Just some followup on the processing-
This pgn was submitted without a result listed at the end of the move string: =============
[Event "Miscellaneous Game"]
[Date "1620.??.??"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Gioachino Greco"]
[Black "NN"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Bc5 3. Qe2 Qe7 4. f4 exf4 5. Nf3 g5 6. h4 f6 7. Nc3 c6 8. hxg5 fxg5 9. d4 g4 10. Nh4 Bxd4 11. Nf5 Bxc3+ 12. bxc3 Qf6 13. Bxf4 Qxc3+ 14. Kf2 b5 15. Bb3 a5 16. Nd6+ Kf8 17. Qxg4 Ba6 18. Qf5+ Qf6 19. Bh6+ Ke7 20. Bg5 Kxd6 21. Bxf6 * ================
So I published it, and you can see that the "machine" automatically corrected the pgn to include the result at the end of the move string. You can also see that the "machine" didn't care about the name order when it processed the submission. [Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1620.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Gioachino Greco"]
[Black "NN"]
[ECO "C23"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "42"]
1.e4 e5 2.Bc4 Bc5 3.Qe2 Qe7 4.f4 exf4 5.Nf3 g5 6.h4 f6 7.Nc3 c6 8.hxg5 fxg5
9.d4 g4 10.Nh4 Bxd4 11.Nf5 Bxc3+ 12.bxc3 Qf6 13.Bxf4 Qxc3+ 14.Kf2 b5 15.Bb3 a5
16.Nd6+ Kf8 17.Qxg4 Ba6 18.Qf5+ Qf6 19.Bh6+ Ke7 20.Bg5 Kxd6 21.Bxf6 1-0 Greco vs NN, 1620 |
|
| Dec-01-20 | | Z4all: <Jess> the first PGN in your post actually does have two results, though they conflict: <[Result "1-0"]> in the header tags shows White won, i.e. <1-0>, but... <... 20. Bg5 Kxd6 21. Bxf6 *> gives a result of "<*>", which means the game was undecided. <Daniel> probably programmed the "machine" to use the more definitive result. A garbled result in the move_list amounts pretty much to a similar situation, so I don't know why it's handled differently. Ah, fringe cases... |
|
| Dec-01-20 | | Z4all: In the past I've written at length about much of this stuff, so I'll spare you a reiteration. Suffice it to say, my opinions haven't changed much(*). As for names - that's basically step 0 if <CG> wants to align itself with the "modern" world. The guiding principle is maintaining information, and compatibility. It's trivia to go from a <collation format> to a <old-style format> with code. But going the other way is impossible since it depends on cultural conventions. Let there be a user option for it, with whatever default the userbase wants. But get the foundation right. (*) Though I have started using the <Source_url> tag much more of late. |
|
| Dec-01-20 | | Z4all: RE: players with identical names.
I wonder how many PGN submitters are utilizing the ChessgamesID tags? |
|
Dec-01-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<z> thanks again for such detailed additional information. I am glad to hear about this topic believe me. This may sound strange, but do you remember when <Daniel> posted about how to use <ChessgamesID tags> to upload games in cases where two players have identical names? In the same post he says that it would be a "bad idea" to use the ID tags for every upload, because of the inevitability of a fatal fingerfehler. I found this explanation somewhat odd when I first read it. I still do, and I am not sure I agree with him on this. What do you think? ===============
Here is the full post and the excerpt I am talking about. chessgames.com chessforum (kibitz #19896) < Please don't feel compelled to add this tag to every upload you make. In fact, it's probably a bad idea to take that approach. Most of the time our software can do just fine without it. If you always supply it, sooner or later even the best of us will make a fingerfehler that introduces an error. And not just a minor error, but a real howler! So, save this for cases where you think confusion might be possible.> |
|
Dec-01-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<z> I have had recourse to using the <ID tags> several times in the recent past. On each occasion I was differentiating between two identically spelled player names. |
|
Dec-02-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<Portobello Mushrooms Benoni> Santasiere vs J W Collins, 1941 |
|
Dec-02-20
| | Phony Benoni: <JFQ> Oh, good Lord, I've screwed up again. The Santasiere - Collins game I was referring to was one I had just submitted for the first time from Ventnor City, 1939. I had mistakenly submitted it with Collins as White, and resubmitted it with the correct colors hoping the erroneus version could be discarded. The game you changed, Santasiere vs J W Collins, 1941, was from an entirely different game played at New York, 1941. It was correct as it stood, with Collins playing White.
It now needs to be changed back.
Sorry for the confusion. I should have made it clear I was talking about the submission from Ventnor City 1939. |
|
Dec-02-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<Probiotic Benoni> J W Collins vs Santasiere, 1941 |
|
Dec-02-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<Prefabricated Benoni> Santasiere vs J W Collins, 1939 |
|
| Dec-02-20 | | Z4all: <JFQ> yes, I reminder that old conversation with <DF>, however vaguely! At the time I was just super-happy he finally utilized the tags for uploads... (and exporting, though I still wish he'd have chosen the more compact notation proposed). Given how likely name overlaps can be, using the ID is a godsend, and allows the submitter to know exactly how the game will be processed. As for <Daniel>'s reservations, they were probably the result of all the effort he put into doing the work-arounds for games w/o ID's. PS- I think he did put the ID's into the PGN files premium users can download. PPS- I think further discussion might go over to the Bistro (thus returning <Phony>'s forum back). |
|
Dec-02-20
| | jessicafischerqueen:
<z> Intriguing. Yes quite right- <Biographer's Bistro> is the place to move- You can also post in my forum at any time on any subject. |
|
Dec-02-20
| | Phony Benoni: <JustForQuestions> Thanks for being so patient. I need to be so careful these days. |
|
Dec-15-20
 | | scormus: <Phony Benoni: ..... I goofed again>
That's quite understandable. So did Robert ;)
What am I talking about?
https://www.artsy.net/artwork/rober... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 905 OF 914 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
