Single Comment

I don't agree with all of that: to me the bended arrow implies a direct (unblockable) distant leap to the marked square, while the circles indicate moves that can be blocked, or steps to adjacent squares. There obviously is some ambiguity here in the case where a move can be blocked on some of the squares along a straight-line path, but not on all. This is a comparatively rare case, so that dedicating a third (rarely used) symbol to it would run the risk that people would not know what it means. So I think the least of all evils is the way Bob did it: use the arrow to indicate the first step can jump over anything between origin and destination, and circles to indicate more distant moves can be blocked. This is how the move diagrams provided by the Interactive Diagram would treat riders as well. It should be intuitively clear that the individual later leaps are similar to the first leap; riders that alternate the jumping properties of their leaps would be very rare indeed. (I never encountered any, but one can of course always design something just for the purpose of breaking existing methods of representation.)

I do agree that the arrows should be reserved for indicating slider moves (i.e. repeating King steps), and that these are redundant as well as confusing in this case. Personally I don't like the arrows much even in that case, and think marking the entire trajectory with circles would be clearer. But one could argue that they are needed to indicate infinite range for moves that run into the board edge of the move diagram. If additional symbols are to be super-imposed to indicate divergent slides, I would recommend to place them only in the square that contains the arrow head (e.g. a red cross if the slide is capture-only). Basically the arrow represents a move to where the arrow head is, blockable on any other square it passes through, with the understanding that this is just one of a sequence of possibilities, and that any other length of the arrow also gives a valid move.