Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

@HG: if this page is accepted for publication by Fergus (I hope it will be) I will need to correct something in the Interactive Diagram: I have not implemented the right Pawn's promotion rule yet. I don't know how to do it. (Pawns promote to the piece of their column). Could you please help me?

Thank you

The unicorn in your interactive diagram is not defined correctly. It should be mpyafsW or [N?fB]

Thank you Daniel for pointing this. Now it is corrected.

@HG: I've experimented different ways but I can't find how to promote the Pawn to the piece that started on the square it goes. I have put the morph code just after the Pawn definition, but it doesn't work. I believe I have not understood. Please, I need your help. Thank you.

You still have promoZone=1 (and maxPromote=1 by default). This causes conflicting instructions to the Diagram: it must both promote the Pawn with the choice given in promoChoice when it reaches last rank, and you specify it to morph there. Promotion per zone/choice prevails in that case, so that the morph specifications for the last rank are ignored. Just set promoZone=0 and the morph would take effect.

Thank you very much HG, for both the solution and the explanation.

Very good article! I really like this variant in this interpretation.

It is indeed a nice page, and about time we had an accurate description here without having to dig through comments!

I was wondering about the decision to keep the literal translations of the Spanish piece names rather than going with the animals (real or mythical) that they actually meant (not only per the illustrations but also per the textual descriptions), as per the translation notes on your own page. I.e. Aanca ≡ Roc, Cocatriz ≡ Crocodile, and Unicorn ≡ Rhino.

Also actual modern Spanish would have ‘Gran Ajedrez’, not ‘Grande’; it's one of a handful of apocopic forms used when preceding a noun.

Thanks Bn Em, I'm going to correct Gran Ajedrez.

I think it is interesting to let the reader know what were the original names considering the confusion that had arisen for the Aanca for example.

I made various edits. This is the main one worth commenting on:

Murray used a different orthograph for the the adjective and wrote Grande Acedrex. It appears that the orthograph was not well stabilized as in our modern era.

I replaced that with this:

Murray used a different orthograph for the the adjective and wrote Grande Acedrex. It appears that the orthograph was not as well stabilized as it has become in our modern era.

I might go further and recommend that we use spelling instead of orthograph unless the latter has a meaning not conveyed by the more familiar word.

@Fergus: I appreciate your edits, please go on. My English is not always good.

Murray used a different orthograph for the the adjective and wrote Grande Acedrex. It appears that the orthograph was not as well stabilized as it has become in our modern era.

I might go further and recommend that we use spelling instead of orthograph unless the latter has a meaning not conveyed by the more familiar word.

I'd suggest replacing the first "orthograph" with "spelling," and the second with "orthography." The latter refers to the system of conventions for writing out a language (especially one that normally uses a different system than the one shown), so it encompasses the idea a bit better.

Thank you both, it's done.

I have also uploaded a very detailled (rarely seen) image of the illustration of Grant Acedrex in the medieval codex. With this, everyone will be able to make his/her own opinion about which animals or beasts are represented or not.