[theme-reviewers] Proposed Modifications to Guidelines

Edward Caissie edward.caissie at gmail.com
Mon Sep 13 16:16:44 UTC 2010

Items 1 through 3 are fine with me ... I've never been too much of a fan of
item 3, but it's been long standing as a required item.

Item 4 I am undecided on, recommended woould definitely be the "strongest"
wording I would accept at this time; and, if it is to be recommended (and
perhaps this should apply to all recommended items) sample code (as a
suggested best-practice method?) to accomplish the recommendation should be
available directly from the Theme Review page if not on the page itself.


PS: I may have more to add to thread later ... still catching up on a lot of
items after a HD (pseudo-)failure. EAC

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> Mostly relating to the Theme Unit Tests, I would propose the following:
> 1) Ignore the intent of the caption text on the centered image with caption
> (e.g. "must be centered, with box"). All that matters is that image and
> caption are centered.
> 2) Author Comment styled (e.g. .bypostauthor CSS class defined) should be
> *recommended*, not *required*
> 3) Not displaying "comments are closed" text on Pages should be
> *recommended*, not *required*.
> 4) Separation of track/pingbacks from comments should be *recommended*
> Thoughts?
> Also, anything that anyone else has come across? Anything else that you
> think should be downgraded from *required* to *recommended* (or vice versa,
> I suppose)?
> Chip
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100913/8c651bbf/attachment.htm>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list