From a search perspective, that [numerical fields for board size etc.] makes sense. But from a browsing perspective, I think it makes sense to include tags for sizes we have many variants in.
We do already support that through the old sidebar and the new menu's RelatedPages->GamesOnSameBoard. Maybe we should expand the area where tags now live to include that, links to the Categories, links to the Related Pages (from GroupID), etc. Or, add tags into the Related Pages menu.
(We should also settle on and publicize some conventions on how to enter fields for infinite boards, boards without a well-defined number of files/ranks (different geometries, e.g.), etc. Similarly for games with variable number of players. There are also some oddities that will push whatever design we choose; I recall but can't find at the moment a game where some pieces treat the board as 2D and others as 4D?)
My issue with Chess+Compounds or FIDE+Compounds is that there are different sets of compounds. Fusion Chess and several related games also include royal compounds. To distinguish these, we might use Pieces:Chess+RBN-Compounds for games with the pieces of Capablanca's Chess and Pieces:Chess+KRBN-Compounds for games with the pieces of Fusion Chess.
I would be OK with that, but I think RBN-compounds-only are the majority and might warrant the shorter if less-clear name. And maybe Man-R-B-N-compounds are also common enough to warrant their own tag (and again we get into a discussion on whether changes like royalty are actually a piece property or a rule variation; should KRBN-compounds be separate from Man-RBN-compounds?).
We do already support that through the old sidebar and the new menu's RelatedPages->GamesOnSameBoard. Maybe we should expand the area where tags now live to include that, links to the Categories, links to the Related Pages (from GroupID), etc. Or, add tags into the Related Pages menu.
(We should also settle on and publicize some conventions on how to enter fields for infinite boards, boards without a well-defined number of files/ranks (different geometries, e.g.), etc. Similarly for games with variable number of players. There are also some oddities that will push whatever design we choose; I recall but can't find at the moment a game where some pieces treat the board as 2D and others as 4D?)
I would be OK with that, but I think RBN-compounds-only are the majority and might warrant the shorter if less-clear name. And maybe Man-R-B-N-compounds are also common enough to warrant their own tag (and again we get into a discussion on whether changes like royalty are actually a piece property or a rule variation; should KRBN-compounds be separate from Man-RBN-compounds?).