[theme-reviewers] Submitting a One-Page Placeholder Theme

Sat Oct 29 17:11:51 UTC 2011

Not sure I agree with this:

I guess my point is that by considering accepting "niche" themes, we are, in
effect, considering accepting themes that do not support the blog use-case
(Launch Effect doesn't even have a loop, let alone paginate_links).

Maybe, and maybe not. A "landing page" is just ONE potential "niche" use
case. What about the support-ticket system Theme? It could conceivably still
have/use blog posts. And that doesn't even get into the myriad ideas I'm
sure that clever Theme developers will come up with.

But here's the thing:

I think a lot of WordPress users and developers out there now just don't see
a blog as a requisite part of a WordPress site. I think it would be great if
a user could go to the repo, look at the tags and say, "hm, I don't need a
blog, I'll just go with this GenericSimpleBiz theme", and get a theme that
doesn't have unnecessary code.

The amount of code that differentiates static-Page output from blog-post
output is *trivial*. Off the top of my head, I'd say that 99% of the
codebase is identical. Not using a blog isn't a separate *use case*, it's
merely a *setting change*. There is really nothing special or "niche" about
using a given WordPress Theme to display only static Pages versus using that
Theme to display blog posts.

While I see great benefit in eradicating the blogging-vs-CMS thinking
regarding WordPress, I see no benefit to end users in hosting Themes in the
repository for which the only extraordinary "feature" is that they don't
support blog post output.

What might be far more beneficial would be to improve the Tag Filter system,
and allow tags for "Blogging", "Personal", "Business", etc. - or whatever,
so that developers could indicate the target user audience for their Themes
- because what differentiates a "business" Theme from a "personal" or
"blogging" Theme is not the presence or absence of blog-post functionality
support, but rather the *front-end design* of the Theme.

Chip

On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Kirk Wight <kwight at kwight.ca> wrote:

> I guess my point is that by considering accepting "niche" themes, we are,
> in effect, considering accepting themes that do not support the blog
> use-case (Launch Effect doesn't even have a loop, let alone paginate_links).
> I don't consider this a bad thing at all, it's awesome - they're all
> WordPress themes. I'd love the theme repo to reflect that, with simple
> placeholder and specialty themes right beside everything else; it just has
> to be evident when browsing the repo (hence the Blog tag).
>
> I think a lot of WordPress users and developers out there now just don't
> see a blog as a requisite part of a WordPress site. I think it would be
> great if a user could go to the repo, look at the tags and say, "hm, I don't
> need a blog, I'll just go with this GenericSimpleBiz theme", and get a theme
> that doesn't have unnecessary code.
>
> Of course, I'm playing devil's advocate a bit here; I know it's not a tonne
> more effort or a tonne more code to support blog functionality. I also
> recognize that a pile more work would be required by Otto, theme reviewers
> and lots of other busy people to accept and evaluate this much wider scope
> of themes. I just really like what we're saying about WordPress: you can
> have any sort of website you want with WordPress, and here are some themes
> we stand behind that can help you do it.
>
> And yes, I totally agree with your frustration in the use of the term
> "CMS"; whoever's responsible for spreading this "its-a-blog-or-a-CMS"
> mentality should be sent to bed without dinner.
>
> On 29 October 2011 11:19, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
>
>> I don't agree. A site that doesn't have a blog doesn't constitute a
>> "niche"; rather, it is a use-case that is built-in to core. Using WordPress
>> "as a CMS" (nb: I detest this phrase; WordPress IS a CMS, no matter *how* it
>> is used - and it is almost always intended to mean "without a blog")
>> requires nothing more than creating a static Page to serve as the Front
>> Page, changing the "Front Page Displays" setting to "static page", assigning
>> the appropriate static page, and then NOT assigning a posts page. Easy
>> peasy.
>>
>>  We don't need special handling for this use-case. Every Theme in the
>> repository should handle it without problem. By default,
>> repository-hosted Themes are expected to handle this use case; that's why we
>> have Guidelines related to display of post metadata and "no comments" type
>> text on static pages.
>>
>> I see no practical reason for a publicly distributed Theme NOT to account
>> for the blog use-case. If we've not adequately covered the non-blog use case
>> in the Guidelines, we can always revisit them.
>>
>> As for the definition of "niche" Themes: they really do need to be an
>> extraordinary use. At this point, it's probably a "know it when we see it"
>> kind of thing. I think the "landing page" use case and the "ticket system"
>> use case are good, instructive examples.
>>
>> Chip
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Kirk Wight <kwight at kwight.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> What distinguishes "niche" themes from "regular" themes is often one
>>> thing: only partial or no implementation of blog functionality. As far as I
>>> can tell, most of the checks from Theme Check and the uploader rely on the
>>> theme being usable as a blog.
>>>
>>> This summer, we found out from the user survey that a lot of developers
>>> use WordPress for sites that don't even have a blog component (just a "CMS",
>>> for lack of a better term) . To me, niche themes are simply themes that, for
>>> whatever reason, choose not to implement full blog functionality.
>>>
>>> We could add a tag filter under Features that is just "blog". If this tag
>>> exists, the uploader and Theme Check plugins check according to the current
>>> criteria. If not, a simpler context can be used (presence of readme.txt,
>>> etc). Obviously this would require rewriting the uploader and theme eval
>>> plugins to react conditionally, but it would seem simpler and more elegant
>>> to me than getting in to theme slugs, white-listing specific users, and
>>> trying to create specific tag filters for each non-standard use-case.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20111029/ca4f6e0b/attachment-0001.htm>