[theme-reviewers] Guidelines regarding Theme Names

[Chip Bennett]

Then we need to address the criterion that Comments are required
functionality.

I think the best course would be to add an exception statement, to allow for
specialized Themes - although personally I don't think barebones support for
comments is all that much of an encumbrance. Regardless, I think
comments.php should still be listed as a required template file. (The above
exception would be implied here.)

Chip

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:

> Very well ... so we are eliminating all the "pure" CMS themes that would
> not use comments?!
>
> If I was to develop a theme that is strictly for the purpose of serving
> information (whatever it may be) then I have no use for comments. If the
> theme is presented in that fashion it should be reviewed as a special case
> and potentially acceptable.
>
> Forcing the inclusion of tempalte files that serve no purpose to the theme
> is simply forcing the theme to be bloated with unused files.
>
>
> Cais.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>
>> The issue is that comments_template() is required for correct
>> implementation of Comments, and the use of comments_template() requires a
>> template file to be passed as an argument.
>>
>> So, if Themes incorporate comments functionality (which is a requirement),
>> they must use comments_template(), ergo, they must have a comments template
>> file.
>>
>> Chip
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Has anyone pinged this directly to nacin? It may just be an oversite or a
>>> core issue that should be addressed versus a template file inclusion issue.
>>>
>>> I'm having a hard time believing the basic minimal requirements need to
>>> be extended beyond including index.php and style.css (with scrennshot.png
>>> only being required for the Extend/Theme repository).
>>>
>>>
>>> Cais.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <
>>> philip at frumph.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  that original simplist theme that came up in this theme reviewers
>>>> thread + comment from otto & nacin
>>>>
>>>> just give it a try with the minimal theme and nacin's plugin, it comes
>>>> up
>>>>
>>>> (and no, no other deprecated messages come up)
>>>>
>>>> - Phil
>>>>
>>>> The official word is that the 'default' functions that fallback in WP
>>>> are never really updated and who knows if they're going to be in there
>>>> anymore in the future.
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> *From:* Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>
>>>> *To:* theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>> *Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 7:41 AM
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [theme-reviewers] Guidelines regarding Theme Names
>>>>
>>>> So no comments.php file throws a deprecated message at you? That doesn't
>>>> seem right ...
>>>>
>>>> What theme is this happening with? I'd like to see this myself ... and
>>>> are there other tempalte files we will need to make requirements for similar
>>>> reasons?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cais.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <
>>>> philip at frumph.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  While your in there add comments.php to the minimal theme files
>>>>> requirement, official deprecated message comes up without it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> *From:* Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>>>> *To:* theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, August 30, 2010 7:35 AM
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [theme-reviewers] Guidelines regarding Theme Names
>>>>>
>>>>> Right on. I threw that together really quickly (and tend to err more
>>>>> toward a "formal" tone anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks good! Some of those (especially the "version-specific,
>>>>> markup-related terms" item. Could probably use more content there. What else
>>>>> similar don't we want in Theme names?
>>>>>
>>>>> Chip
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Edward Caissie <
>>>>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I didn't change the intent of the section, but I did go in and
>>>>>> "lightened-up" the text a bit ... it's a little less "formal" but the
>>>>>> meaning is the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cais.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  See here:
>>>>>>> http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review#Theme_Name
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please advise, comment, correct, and/or add appropriate Theme
>>>>>>> Name-related guidelines. I notice I'm running into several instances where I
>>>>>>> have to comment on the Theme Name. Some objective guidelines in this area
>>>>>>> will be helpful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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/20100830/7525330d/attachment.htm>