The text on this page says: "here is an ugly ASCII diagram of the setup" And what follows is an Interactive Diagram probably made by HGM!
The text could be corrected.
The project of inserting IDs also keeps the original text and (possibly ASCII) diagram, within <noscript> tags, for the benefit of users that have JavaScript switched off in their browser (so they would not be able to see the ID). In this case I overlooked that there was some text that was still on the wrong side of that noscript tag. I moved it now.
The text of this article in fact needs many corrections. For one, the brackets in the extension of the 'funny notation' he proposes show up as A instead (qAWFAqAFWA where he means to say q[WF]q[FW]). In fact he acknowledges himself that the part about notation does not belong in this article, and that he will move it away at some point. I guess he never got to do that.
Another issue is that this article doesn't describe a single variant, but gives several initial positions on boards of several sizes, which could each use an ID. For the moment I just picked the one I considered most interesting (i.e. the one involving unorthodox pieces).
And yes, I am guilty w.r.t. some of the piece names. Betza did not assign names, but for the purpose of the ASCII diagrams he did assign letters to the pieces: D for FD, J for NCZ, W for KA. So I just picked some names that matched those letters and for which I had suitable images. The NCZ is actually in the Piececlopedia under the name Buffalo, but the page about it was by Charles Gilman, and he seems to live in a parallel universe w.r.t. piece naming.
The project of inserting IDs also keeps the original text and (possibly ASCII) diagram, within <noscript> tags, for the benefit of users that have JavaScript switched off in their browser (so they would not be able to see the ID). In this case I overlooked that there was some text that was still on the wrong side of that noscript tag. I moved it now.
The text of this article in fact needs many corrections. For one, the brackets in the extension of the 'funny notation' he proposes show up as A instead (qAWFAqAFWA where he means to say q[WF]q[FW]). In fact he acknowledges himself that the part about notation does not belong in this article, and that he will move it away at some point. I guess he never got to do that.
Another issue is that this article doesn't describe a single variant, but gives several initial positions on boards of several sizes, which could each use an ID. For the moment I just picked the one I considered most interesting (i.e. the one involving unorthodox pieces).
And yes, I am guilty w.r.t. some of the piece names. Betza did not assign names, but for the purpose of the ASCII diagrams he did assign letters to the pieces: D for FD, J for NCZ, W for KA. So I just picked some names that matched those letters and for which I had suitable images. The NCZ is actually in the Piececlopedia under the name Buffalo, but the page about it was by Charles Gilman, and he seems to live in a parallel universe w.r.t. piece naming.