I’m glad I could help. It’s been more than three years since CG.com first made the viewer available here. Since then, our big community has probably loaded every accessible game in it and I’m very happy about the results of such extensive usage.

Here’s how you can load any position. Take a complete PGN (including the PGN headers) of any puzzle. Then find and replace the FEN string with your own. Finally select all and paste it into CVD.

Is there an order of precedence that a viewer is instructed to use in guessing a game result, as in " [Event "not yet"]
[Site "nowhere"]
[Date "2011.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "white"]
[Black "black"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "2"]

1.e3 d5 2.c4# 1/2-1/2 }1/2-0 , later declared by appeal to arbiter, as one player's point was reduced{ "

One can snip away the plycount, find the round tag between a separate set of lines, & even edit an EOline result. Some viewers also to be able to handle spaces or delete periods beyond a move number.

When a gid is PotD, is it possible to have a user option to hide the remaining moves & result temporarily, as well as hide the sack cataloguer below, but for that gid only?

J McDonald vs B Fiedler, 2008 use a sort of non-pgn that displays variation-branching, but are there rules of which sorts of braces & brace nesting - <>, [], {},() - to use &/or when?

Currently 2 tabs exist beneath a general viewer ("games" - or games list, but not variations list - changing vars are handled by the blue arrow; & "annotator" - chessbase 9 uses a pre & post-annotate series of tabs in the form of language choices, preceeded by an "all"). Has anyone toyed with support for a tab system for:

(1) tab1 = [comments - annotator1]; tab2 = [?! - annotator2]; ...; tabn = [? - annotatorn]; (2) scoresheettab = [things like draw offers "=", or clock display times, in the case that players are recording times on a per-move basis]

for (1), put punctation in the box below, as opposed to one the scoresheet & for (2) one might decide to display clock-times to a clock-pane tab or picture of a clock. M Whissell vs L Henry, 2010 is an example with mainly clock annotations (& a transposition at the end - as well as 2 black arrows in some of the annotations boxes below - one presumes because of the non-pgn format pre & post annotations options in other editorial software) & H R Jung vs M Dougherty, 2001 is one with a "draw offer" (typed out here, instead of using an "=" in the annotations, with rejection of offer, since the game continued onwards; other times, an engine might interpret it as an equally scored position as far as a num. eval might go...).

One might also like to specify the starting/secondary control & increments (in some cases, BOTH players can use their own clock-time recording systems, which can make the numbers look confusing - 117 might mean 1:17 or 117 minutes or seconds! -& some tournaments use a short 1st round primary time-control, when the pairings are most likely to be lopsided in terms of rating).

A) <guessing a game result>. The PGN specification http://www.saremba.de/chessgml/stan... defines the use of Result tag, saying “It is always exactly the same as the game termination marker that concludes the associated movetext.”. As you can see there’s no need to guess the game result because it’s required to match the Result tag. Am I missing something?

B) CVD is primarily a PGN viewer and ensuring PGN compliance has been my main concern. Sharing chess information and ideas was only possible thanks to that format. As I said elsewhere “PGN is for chess enthusiasts what sheet music is for musicians”. In addition, CVD already supports a special puzzle mode that allows presentation of chess puzzles in an interactive form. Unfortunately, chess puzzles have more than one appropriate way of presenting (eg let’s also hide out the result). On my blog http://chesstuff.blogspot.com, you can find many examples of puzzles that are supported. Showing only part of the moves in a game is not supported and neither is jumping in the middle of a game.

C) J McDonald vs B Fiedler, 2008 is an example of perfectly valid PGN which is only slightly unusual. In fact, CVD does an excellent job parsing it. If you’re suggesting that we start interpreting and speculating about author’s intentions, you have changed the topic away from PGN.

D) The 2 black arrows at move 30 in M Whissell vs L Henry, 2010 are a good example of multiple annotations. Instead of merging them together, which seem irresponsible, CVD keeps them separate so different annotations (and/or annotators) can be inter-missed. I’m not sure but that might be similar to the multi-tabs you’re talking about earlier.

Once again, CVD remains a PGN viewer. In many cases, sufficient clock information can be presented as comments and I’ve done that even for live broadcasts. On the other hand, chess events have plenty of additional information which is often tough to organize and present in a user-friendly format. Doing that is clearly a bigger task which justifies its own project.

In 1 or 2 cases, it may have changed the ["Result"] tag, but not the delimiter value when it tossed off errors such as "run-time error in:" 10501, 20501, 20911 or 22801. However, since chessgames is not chessbase error reporting support, there is probably not much need to talk of further complexities of entering or pairing olympiad-style team swisses for recording in chessbase.

It's nice to see that CVD/cbv/cbh format usually pastes well from chessbase into notepad, and then onto an upload page (sometimes after slight editing of a cbh header to better match a chessgames header or pid name spelling convention), but those types or errors are ones to watch out for.

The fact that the cbh rather than the pgn has an easier way to call a look-up (say, for entries of players of post-2006 age in the big2006 database that is often used as a reference database for chessbase) of a player spelling format (at their save mask & replace mask menus where the "?" buttons appear) is a major reason to use that format for scoresheet entry.