Comments by Fergus Duniho

On the page /index-test.html, I have augmented the CSS implementation of the color schemes with a JavaScript implementation. The CSS implementation works without JavaScript, but it requires the use of :has(), which earlier browsers do not support. The JavaScript implementation is working on both my Kindle browser and on both Chrome and Edge on my iPad 2, though the latter two require you to save your change before it takes effect. I don't think there are browsers more primitive than these that still need to be supported. By providing both a CSS and a JavaScript way to change the color scheme, this expands the number of browsers it will work well on. I plan to add the code for this to the site tomorrow. In the meantime, try it out and let me know how it works for you, particularly if you have some older device I am not using.

I could not figure out what closing tag you were mentioning.

I already fixed that bug, and it was in my code, not yours.

This ID still does not work properly!

I tested it in Safari, Edge, and Firefox this morning, and it was working in all of them, though I did have to reload the page in Firefox before the board would display.

When I go to any person information page and try to view unpublished submissions, it just shows my own submissions.

Okay, I corrected that.

There was a typo in implementing a new property I had added. I added the displayPieces property, which when set above zero will display the piece table when the page loads. This much worked as it should, but when it was not set, it omitted the closing > in the tag, which caused what followed it to not be displayed.

It's important to maintain backwards compatibility, and anyone who doesn't like the name of Aanca is free to use a different name with an alias.

For some reason, it cannot find the description even though the path to that file is correct, but I'm not really concerned about that.

It wasn't prepending ROOT to the filename. So it was actually incorrect. I have now fixed that.

Therefore Fergus created separate HTML pages for individual variants, which embed the Jocly applet preconfigured to run the corresponding variant, with a rule description. The overview page you refer to contains links to those individual game pages.

While I used to make separate HTML pages for individual variants, I replaced this practice with a PHP script that gets called through a semantic URL whose relative part starts with "/play/jocly/". If you want to review its code to see how it works, you can find the script at "/play/jocly/control.php". It relies on certain files being in place to display the description, rules and credits. It should work with games that have not been indexed yet, and if you do use it with unindexed games, you can, as an editor, add them to the index.

Please remove these unneeded lines from Edit Metadata also. I’ve written new page, thank you, but when I tried to revert it to Members-only, error repeated. It shows that I’m veteran contributor with nine or more submissions, so I cannot publish more if I have nine submissions to review (even if it’s not).

While it was giving you the same error message, it wasn't due to extra code again. This time, another variable was undefined, which caused its counts of the database to return the wrong values, and the solution was to add a new line assigning its value.

I'm sure there's a reason for this, but why is it that having legality defined for move highlighting isn't enough to have legal moves enforced?

1. Rule enforcement was a feature before showing legal moves was. Instead of replacing the standard method for rule enforcement, calculating all possible legal moves ahead of time was done as an extra step.

2. Additionally, moves sometimes had side effects that were not explicitly mentioned in the notation for a move, such as en passant capture in Chess or changing the side of a piece and placing it in hand for Shogi. This imposed the requirement of running code for the actual move when it was made.

3. Because calculating all possible legal moves is more expensive than just calculating whether one move is legal, it is done only in the Post-Game section. So, if rule enforcement depended upon the calculation of all possible moves for each turn, it would work only in on-going games made one move at a time, or it would have to be repeatedly done in the Post-Move sections, which would prolong the calculation of whether a series of moves were all legal. The way it currently works, it evaluates the legality of a series of moves much more efficiently than it would if it had to calculate all possible moves after each move. For the sake of efficiency, which kind of matters in an interpreted language written in another interpreted language, it makes sense to calculate all possible legal moves only when there is a choice of which move to make. For past moves, calculating all this is just overkill.

[Edit: combined 3 and 4]

That’s not what I meant. I was looking for Reche's Super Faceoff Masquerade and could not find it. Please be clear about what you were doing and walk me through it step by step.