Message FOR draughts programmers: request FOR review of NEW PDN 3.0 standard

Dear draughts programmers,

This message has just been posted on the FMJD, ACF, FFJD and other programming forums. Please forward this to any interested programmer not copied in already.

----------------------------------------
PDN 3.0 Standard Review Request
----------------------------------------

This is a request to review Wieger Wesselink's PDN 3.0 draft standard. The goal of this review is to arrive at an official standard that is recognized by the World Draughts Federation (FMJD).

The review period starts October 1st 2011 and ends January 31st 2012.

The documentation is available here: http://10x10.org/pdn/
An online PDN 3.0 checker is available here: http://10x10.org/pdn/test/
Earlier draft versions were discussed at this thread at the FMJD forum: http://laatste.info/bb/viewtopic.php?t=2544

The PDN 3.0 draft standard attempts to give a formal definition of PDN, portable draughts notation. It is more formal than previous versions in the sense that grammars are defined, and additional restrictions are documented. It also defines some extensions for setting up positions and for specifying clock times after a move in a game.

The 10x10.org website also gives concrete implementations for 3 different parser generators (DParser, Grammatica, TPG) on 3 different platforms (C, Java & Python). Other parser generators with similar capabilities should also be able to accomodate this grammar. In particular, preliminary research suggests that the given grammar specifications in DParser, Grammatica, TPG are most likely also implementable with Bison/Flex, ANTLR or Boost.Spirit that are available on C/C++ platforms.

Reviews may answer the following questions:

* What is your evaluation of the documentation?
* What sections in the PDN 3.0 draft need to be improved? Please be as specific as possible.
* Are there any provisions in the grammar that prevent implementation in a popular parser generator (Bison/Flex, Boost.Spirit, ANTLR)?
* Are there any legacy PDN files that are not properly parsed by the proposed grammar specification?
* Did you try to use the grammar? With what compiler/parser generator/platform? Did you have any problems?
* How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick reading? In-depth study?

Of course, 'informal reviews' and discussion are also welcome.

And finally, every review should answer this question:

* Do you think the PDN 3.0 draft standard should become an official FMJD standard? Be sure to say this explicitly so that your other comments don't obscure your overall opinion. A vote to accept the standard may be conditional.

Reviews can be submitted on the World Draughts Forum, http://laatste.info/bb3/viewtopic.php?t=3448.
On this thread there is also room for questions and discussion about the PDN 3.0 draft standard.

The review procedure is as follows: at the conclusion of the review period, the Review Manager will post a message to the World Draughts Forum saying if the PDN 3.0 proposal has been accepted or rejected. A rationale is also helpful, but its extent is up to the Review Manager. If there are suggestions, or conditions that must be met before final inclusion, they should be stated.

On behalf of World Draughts Federation FMJD,

Wieger Wesselink – pdn 3.0 Draft Submitter
Rein Halbersma – Review Manager
Marcel Kosters – Review Wizard
Frank Teer – FMJD Secretary General