> On 14 Apr 2015, at 02:21, Garth Wallace <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Monday, April 13, 2015, Hans Aberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 13 Apr 2015, at 23:18, Garth Wallace <[email protected]> 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 >>> CLOCKWISE-ROTATED and ANTICLOCKWISE-ROTATED (e.g. U+29BC), but I >>> wasn't sure I would be proposing the knights in intermediate 45 degree >>> rotations. >> >> Have you checked if they are here: >> http://www.chessvariants.org/index/mainquery.php?type=Piececlopedia&orderby=LinkText&displayauthor=1&displayinventor=1&usethisheading=Piececlopedia >> > 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 ⇒ RIGHTWARDS DOUBLE ARROW U+21D2 So one can have both.
