[theme-reviewers] Coding Standard

Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) philip at frumph.net
Tue Apr 30 13:15:12 UTC 2013


They stumble over it because it’s the reviewers determination to whether or not they warrant being in a plugin and not in the theme.
It’s not a black and white.
Jeeze, imagine a single plugin for a theme that does an output of theme content in a shortcode that’s specific for that theme, .. uh what use is that ?
seriously.


From: Thomas from ThemeZee 
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 2:07 AM
To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org 
Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] Coding Standard

Hi everybody,


in my opinion the Guidelines should clearly point out that Shortcodes and Custom Post Types are not allowed to use in themes. This is a point where both reviewers and theme authors often stumble over.


I know we have the passage: "Since the purpose of Themes is to define the presentation of user content, Themes must not be used to define the generation of user content, or to define Theme-independent site options or functionality."  

But most people misinterpret this passage or overread it or maybe don't realize what it means - I don't know - but we had the discussion about Shortcodes and CPTs a lot lateley. I had to ask about it a few weeks ago and I have contributed some themes to the directory a long time before. 

The Guidelines already contain a clear phrase that TimThumb is not allowed, I would suggest that there is a similiar phrase in the Guidelines which forbid shortcodes and CPTs.


Best Regards,

Thomas




2013/4/29 Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>

  This. 

  The Guidelines - i.e. the things that are *required* - are in one place only: the Theme Review Codex page:
  http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review


  The Make/Themes site is used to discuss the guidelines; if anything is formalized, it will be added to the Codex page. There are things that we occasionally miss, so if you have any specific Guidelines that were decided on the Make/Themes site, but not added to the Codex, please bring them up, and we'll make sure the Codex is accurate.

  Thanks,

  Chip



  On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Amy Hendrix <sabreuse at gmail.com> wrote:

    If that's a common occurrence (and I haven't been reviewing enough
    lately to know how common it really is), then that's a MAJOR problem.
    The Make site is where changes to the guidelines are *discussed*, but
    it's the nature of such discussions that not all points that are
    discussed are actually adopted as guidelines.

    To put it bluntly, reviewers, please DO NOT say things are required if
    they aren't actually required in the Review Guidelines. Passing the
    review process is difficult already; we absolutely need to have a
    clear and consistently enforced set of guidelines. There are enough
    complaints out there that the guidelines are arbitrary and constantly
    changing without people saying things are required when they're not.


    On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
    > can't recall any instantly, but reviewers usually point to make site and
    > state that its a required issue even tough its not mentioned on org
    > guidelines.
    >
    >
    > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
    >>
    >> What policies, specifically?
    >>
    >>
    >> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> A few policies are formulated on make site but they don't make it to
    >>> guidelines on .org
    >>> so these policies are only recommended then?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes. At the moment, the Coding and CSS standards are only *recommended*.
    >>>> Making them *required* may be a bridge we cross at some point, but we're not
    >>>> there right now.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If this does not cause any issues, I would say recommended.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Emil
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Stephen Cui <scui2005 at gmail.com>
    >>>>> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Hi,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> During the theme review, my theme has a "required issue" for next
    >>>>>> version:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> There are inconsistency in spacing around parenthesis throughout the
    >>>>>> theme. Recommend to read the WordPress? PHP coding standards.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://make.wordpress.org/core/handbook/coding-standards/php/#space-usage
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I have no problem to make such changes as it is good practice. I also
    >>>>>> take the chance to revisit the code.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> My question is " is it required?" or "just recommended".
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Regards
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Stephen
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> _______________________________________________
    >>>>>> 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
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> _______________________________________________
    >>> 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
    >
    _______________________________________________
    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/20130430/39aa56e2/attachment.html>


More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list