[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2018-May-20, 15:17, said:

That's not what GCC is.

GCC is General Convention Chart, it's the regulation that lists what conventions you're allowed to play in ACBL tournaments. It's not a specific set of agreements, you still have to work those out with a new partner.

BBO allows users to define a new Generic Convention Card or a new ACBL Convention Card, I assume that is what was being referred to. Both are fairly clear, but the ACBL card has an ACBL focus and the GCC is free-text, unsuitable for computer analysis.

There is also a third format of convention card which allows a tree structured "Details" definition of the actual bidding sequences (see stock cards Precision, SAYC, WJ2005 etc) and is presumably used to explain actual bidding on BBO. This seems more promising, but I can only see how to make a copy of a stock card in My Convention Cards, not how to create one from scratch or (more important) modify a copy. The EDIT button is there but nothing much happens.

[barmar]

 pescetom, on 2018-May-21, 09:09, said:

There is also a third format of convention card which allows a tree structured "Details" definition of the actual bidding sequences (see stock cards Precision, SAYC, WJ2005 etc) and is presumably interpreted during actual bidding on BBO. This seems more promising, but I can only see how to make a copy in My Convention Cards, not how to create one from scratch or (more important) modify a copy of a stock card. The EDIT button is there but nothing much happens.

That's called "Full Disclosure" convention cards. It's only possible to create these using a Windows application, and only the Windows version of BBO can upload them. I don't think we have any plans to create a web version of this tool, so they're effectively obsolete. The best we might someday do is provide a way to upload these CCs using a web tool, so that users who have the windows application can create and update them. But FDCC is basically an experiment that we gave up on, so we're not going to expend much effort on them.

[pescetom]

 barmar, on 2018-May-21, 09:16, said:

That's called "Full Disclosure" convention cards. It's only possible to create these using a Windows application, and only the Windows version of BBO can upload them. I don't think we have any plans to create a web version of this tool, so they're effectively obsolete. The best we might someday do is provide a way to upload these CCs using a web tool, so that users who have the windows application can create and update them. But FDCC is basically an experiment that we gave up on, so we're not going to expend much effort on them.

Can I ask why you gave up on FDCC? It looks like a great idea to me. I tried using the BBOITA's stock CC because that is a system I know and enjoy, but there were some errors in the CC and I wasn't able to modify it or get it modified so I gave up.

[TylerE]

 pescetom, on 2018-May-21, 09:09, said:

BBO allows users to define a new Generic Convention Card or a new ACBL Convention Card, I assume that is what was being referred to. Both are fairly clear, but the ACBL card has an ACBL focus and the GCC is free-text, unsuitable for computer analysis.

That's a very dangerous overloading of terms. You wouldn't refer to a Advanced Telephony Module as an ATM.

[Lovera]

 pescetom, on 2018-May-21, 12:33, said:

Can I ask why you gave up on FDCC? It looks like a great idea to me. I tried using the BBOITA's stock CC because that is a system I know and enjoy, but there were some errors in the CC and I wasn't able to modify it or get it modified so I gave up.

You are on my feet: look here from my topic "Alert" http://www.bridgebas...post__p__873259

[barmar]

 pescetom, on 2018-May-21, 12:33, said:

Can I ask why you gave up on FDCC? It looks like a great idea to me. I tried using the BBOITA's stock CC because that is a system I know and enjoy, but there were some errors in the CC and I wasn't able to modify it or get it modified so I gave up.

The whole design is kind of limited and difficult to use. You have to list the meaning of entire sequences of bids, and that's not how bridge bidding logic works. You end up with a combinatorial explosion of similar bidding sequences, because there are so many ways to get to the same end point. It works OK for the first couple of rounds of constructive bidding, but then you have dozens of sequences to describe. When you incorporate competitive bidding, it becomes unmanageable.

What's really needed is a way to write logical rules rather than just a simple tree structure. That's what we have in the GIB bidding rules file, and what we've learned from programming GIB is that this is also incredibly complicated.