Re: Chess symbol rotations (revisited)

From: Hans Aberg <>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:54:53 +0200

> On 14 Apr 2015, at 02:21, Garth Wallace <> wrote:
>> On Monday, April 13, 2015, Hans Aberg <> wrote:
>>> On 13 Apr 2015, at 23:18, Garth Wallace <> wrote:
>>> I'm much further along on my research for a proposal to encode
>>> heterodox chess symbols. I asked about terms for rotations last
>>> November and was told that the terms in use in the standard are
>>> wasn't sure I would be proposing the knights in intermediate 45 degree
>>> rotations.
>> Have you checked if they are here:
> The Piececlopedia doesn't really address symbols directly, it
> describes pieces by their moves. Rotated chess piece symbols are used as placeholders, with their actual identities as pieces assigned on a problem-by-problem basis (only the 180 degree turned queen and knight are fixed by convention, to the grasshopper and nightrider). Think variables, rather than constants. So, for example, in one problem a knight turned 90 degrees clockwise may be a camel (1,3 leaper), in
> another problem a mao (xiangqi horse), and still another problem may use a knight turned 90 degrees counter-clockwise for the camel instead. Without context, it means "a knight-like piece of some variety, but not an actual knight". This is long-standing practice in fairy chess problems.

The mathematical symbols are a mixture of graphical and semantic descriptions. For example
 ⊂ SUBSET OF U+2282
So one can have both.
Received on Tue Apr 14 2015 - 03:57:03 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Apr 14 2015 - 03:57:04 CDT