[theme-reviewers] Post formats

[Chip Bennett]

Love it!

I would propose adding it to OPTIONAL WordPress features initially, until we
get a handle on how quickly and how widespread Post Formats become. Of
course, as with RECOMMENDED features, implementation itself is not required,
but if the feature is implemented, it is REQUIRED to be implemented
properly.

That will mean that current Themes that provide custom loops for "Gallery"
and "Asides" categories (or any of the standard post
formats<http://codex.wordpress.org/Post_Formats>)
will need to migrate to use of Post Formats, while optionally providing
backward-compatibility to the current implementation.

By the way, here's the master list of major 3.1
changes<http://codex.wordpress.org/Version_3.1>.
Anything else in there we should be considering?

As for other Guidelines changes for 3.1, I would add the following
proposals:

1) Everything currently marked as "draft" in the Guidelines
2) Use of "License"/"License URI" header tags increases in criticality from
*recommended* to *required*
3) Use of TimThumb prohibited (*required* not to use, even for backward
compatibility). If we go this route, I will volunteer to put together a
tutorial for how to migrate TimThumb-generated images using custom fields
over to the WordPress media manager.

Additional changes to the Theme Review Codex page:

1) Once we are up and running on our WPORG site, I propose that we move all
non-Guideline information (e.g. Process, Scope, How to Become a Theme
Reviewer) over to the WPORG site. (Perhaps leave the "Resources" section, as
it has links to various Theme check/validation tools.)
2) Re-write the Guidelines so that we have a condensed list of the
Guidelines in principle, with intra-page links to expanded/detailed
information about each Guideline (as per the mail-list discussion from a
couple weeks ago).

Anything else?

Just as an FYI: WP 3.1 is scheduled for a December release, so we need to
get any version-specific Guidelines revisions up as soon as possible. I
would want to shoot for having the version-specific changes published at or
around the time of the first beta release of 3.1.

Chip

On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 8:05 AM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:

> This is a great idea for WP3.1 Theme recommendations. Thanks!
>
>
> Cais.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>
>> Future suggestion, just starting discussion now.
>>
>> http://wpdevel.wordpress.com/2010/11/05/post-formats-in-core/
>>
>> Post formats are a new thing that will be in 3.1. Basic idea is to
>> provide a specific method for specifying the "format" of a post, for
>> display. This is to replace the usage of categories for much the same
>> thing.
>>
>> Example: Asides. In the past, it's often been suggested to make an
>> "asides" category, and then posts can be put into that category and
>> displayed differently based on either styling rules from post_class()
>> or from in_category('asides').
>>
>> This new approach allows a theme to define a set of post formats like so:
>> add_theme_support( 'post-formats', array( 'aside', 'gallery', 'whatever' )
>> );
>>
>> And then the post format can be selected when saving the post. A
>> function call of "get_post_format( $post->ID )" can be used to
>> determine the format, and post_class() will also create
>> "format-whatever" classes, for pure-css styling.
>>
>> So, recommendation for future themes (post-3.1): Do not use categories
>> for displaying posts differently. Instead, support post-formats.
>>
>> -Otto
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20101105/14366935/attachment.htm>