On 24.10.2014 01:19, Peter Drake wrote:
Isn't A an eye here?
.....
.xxx.
.xAx.
.xxx.
.....
(Remember, I'm trying to define "eye", not "life").
If you want to use eye in a broader sense, then every region that is
- connected via lines,
- adjacent and only adjacent to the player's live stones,
- containing empty intersections,
- possibly containing dead opposing stones
is an eye.
Capture seems to be the more common term.
Informal writing does not care for the difference between capture and
removal. Accurate writing specifies capture as the transformation from
unsettled to dead and removal as the taking off the board.
"surrounded" is less exact than "adjacent and only adjacent to".
I'm not sure I understand your wording.
Surrounded is ambiguous, adjacent and only adjacent to is exact. It is
adjacent to something and it is only adjacent to the something and not
to something else.
I'm writing up some "how to play Go" flyers
AGA rules.
So you do NOT NEED ANY life, death and eyes! AGA Rules are unnecessarily
complicated in their text. They ought to drop life and death. A flyer
must be short, so drop the unnecessary! Speak of "stones (not) on the
board".
Read http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/asintro.pdf
Note how I do NOT mention life, death, eyes.
AGA rules, of course, allow either area or territory scoring.
AGA Rules, of course, use area scoring, do not use territory scoring,
allow the area score to be determined by either area counting for area
scoring or territory scoring for area scoring.
Your rules appear to be largely equivalent to AGA
No, but ignore them if you want to use AGA style rules anyway.
--
robert jasiek
_______________________________________________
Computer-go mailing list
Computer-go@dvandva.org
http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
