Charles Matthews wrote:
It is being argued that xiangqi (Chinese chess) is appropriately labelled 'chess variant', when it predates chess and can't be a variant of it. So it's like saying soccer is a 'gridiron variant'.
Hmm. In that case, can't we call it "similar to chess" or something of that sort, that allows us to both orient the reader who may be familiar with chess and unfamiliar with xiangqi, without making claims about what is a variant of what (especially wrong claims)?
-Mark