[wp-hackers] WP Theme Directory Submission Restrictions
zamoose at gmail.com
Mon Oct 6 16:18:22 GMT 2008
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
> Some kinds of creativity should be suppressed. I don't want my
> mechanic getting all creative when fixing my car engine, nor do I want
> my plumber getting creative while running my shower lines... And I
> don't want my WordPress themes to be all creative about where the
> styles go.
> I mean, you must have a style.css file, in much the same way that
> WordPress requires specific naming for many other files. Does that
> also suppress creativity?
No, it's not suppressive. Mandating that all non-required CSS styles
exist in your single style.css IS suppressive.
> I ask somebody, anybody, to present a valid use case for not having
> these mandatory styles (and they ARE mandatory, in the sense that your
> theme is broken in 2.5 and up if you don't have them) in the style.css
> file. There's only about 8 of them, you could stick them at the end of
> the style.css file, after your @import lines (which are also, in
> themselves, evil) if you wanted to. Why keep them separate? What,
> exactly, is the advantage to that? If your theme is worth it's salt,
> then those styles are different for each theme anyway, so there's not
> going to be a whole lot of code reuse going on.
Perhaps. However, many of my themes use styling that is fairly
similar, thus it would be nice to reuse those styles without having to
hand update per-theme. And let's not forget about Child Themes...
> Which is true in general, really. CSS doesn't see a lot of code reuse
> if you're doing it properly.
Not true. Please see Blueprint, YUI, et al. for explicit
contradiction of your statement.
> The whole point of moving styling out
> into the CSS is that the HTML becomes semantic. You're not supposed to
> use "alignright" and "centered" classes in HTML, really, because
> you're supposed to define things as what they actually are (post,
> title, etc), and let the CSS handle the styling. The only reason we're
> using these non-semantic classes in WordPress is that we have to
> signal the theme what the users selection was from the editor, in
> order to let the theme handle the styling correctly, and these are
> easy to understand and deal with.
I don't agree. The class names are certainly named after their
intended layout purpose, but you can put lie to their actual meaning
by, say, defining .alignright's float: property to "left". The class
names are simply that -- class names. They're used as a cheap hack at
the moment to allow users some sort of WYSIWYG functionality.
> So if you're defining things semantically in your own themes, there's
> not going to be a heck of a lot of code reuse. And if you're using
> tricks and hacks for CSS on a regular basis, then you're doing it
> wrong anyway, no?
Simply not true. I have a reset.css that I use time and again to reset
all the standard HTML entities' properties back to a base level that
then gives me explicit control over every pad, float, clear, margin,
> That's just my opinion, of course. Sorry for the mini-rant. :)
What would we talk about if we didn't have disagreements? *grin*
More information about the wp-hackers