[theme-reviewers] more experienced feedback

[Edward Caissie]

Why not include, from your example, the Google Font in the package? Is
there a benefit to making an API call versus referencing a locally
available resource?


Cais.


On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> I'm wondering why it would be a *bad* thing to say that all Themes must be
> self-contained, and should not hotlink any resources?
>
> (I think API references are okay; e.g. Google Fonts - if they're not
> there, the CSS will fall back to another font, so the experience might be
> degraded, but it will degrade mostly gracefully.)
>
> Chip
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> @Kirk - Leave a comment to the effect of what Otto has suggested why this
>> method should not be used.
>>
>> @Otto et al. - This should go into the Guidelines as *not* "best
>> practice", again for the same reason. "Banning" seems like such a harsh
>> word to use, I'm thinking simply not-approve-able due to the potential for
>> "common" end-user conditions to cause the theme to simply not work, i.e.:
>> intranet installation.
>>
>> I'm thinking something along these lines for the Guidelines: Themes must
>> be self-contained within themselves and/or the WordPress core
>> functionality. For example, externally referenced files may not always be
>> available to the end-user and therefore should not be used.
>>
>> The question is now where to put that into the guidelines as I recommend
>> it become effective with the "new" 3.3 guidelines. Any one have any
>> suggestions?
>>
>>
>> Cais.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kirk Wight <kwight at kwight.ca> wrote:
>>> > In particular, the theme uses a bunch of external APIs for the post
>>> formats;
>>> > I've searched the mailing list archives, and didn't find anything
>>> explicitly
>>> > banning it, but, well, it weirds me out. A look at how the options are
>>> > implemented would be appreciated too.
>>>
>>> While there's nothing wrong with the files he's including and the
>>> sources are trustworthy enough, these files should be included in the
>>> theme and not added directly from external sites.
>>>
>>> In particular:
>>>
>>> wp_register_style('html5reset',
>>> 'http://html5resetcss.googlecode.com/files/html5-reset-1.4.css
>>> ',false,$theme_data['Version']);
>>> wp_enqueue_style( 'html5reset');
>>> wp_register_script('yui-css','
>>> http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.8.0r4/build/yuiloader/yuiloader-min.js
>>> ',false,'2.8.0r4');
>>> wp_enqueue_script('yui-css');
>>> wp_register_script('jquery-template',
>>> 'http://nje.github.com/jquery-tmpl/jquery.tmpl.js', array('jquery'),
>>> '0.1');
>>> wp_enqueue_script('jquery-template');
>>>
>>> This is bad because it adds a dependency on those sites. This means
>>> the theme won't work for some cases, such as on an internal intranet
>>> where the user viewing the site has no access to the public internet
>>> (this is a *far* more common use case than you might think).
>>>
>>> While there's no explicit guidelines prohibiting it that I found in
>>> the theme review list, I kinda sorta think that it should be banned.
>>> There's no good reason a theme can't simply package up these libraries
>>> in the theme, presuming the licenses on the libraries is compatible.
>>> YUI is BSD licensed, JQuery Template is MIT or GPLv2, and the reset
>>> CSS is public domain. All compatible.
>>>
>>> -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
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20111224/40eae52d/attachment.htm>