[theme-reviewers] Question about ob_start and ob_get_clean (Vicky Arulsingam)

Sun Jul 3 19:13:18 UTC 2011

*Themes are not obligated to manage plugins or their functionality.*

This I can agree with.

*Themes must not allow users to manage plugins or their functionality.*

This is--in my opinion--an overreaching, unnecessary extreme.

*Themes in the WP repository should be suitable for the majority of users.*

This I can agree with.

*Themes in the WP repository must not offer features that do not appeal to
the majority of users.*

Again, taken to this extreme, a reasonable "rule of thumb" becomes
unreasonable, and users lose.

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:

> Although I have read this entire thread (OK, I skimmed a few parts) IMO, in
> the simplest of terms: a Theme is a Theme and should generally be dealing
> with the general look and feel of a web site (NB: This is not just a
> WordPress thing.); it is not a Theme's concern or obligation to manage
> plugins or their functionality. Given this, and my understanding or the ob_*
> functions, they really have no place (as described and argued for) in a
> theme being hosted on the WordPress Extend Themes repository. Perhaps their
> is a niche group that is being argued for, but that niche group can easily
> be served from another distribution network as one of the major premises of
> the Extend Themes repository, as I see it, is to serve the over-all or
> majority of the WordPress user base.
>
>
> Cais.
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Darren Slatten <darrenslatten at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> *p.s. if you're going to admonish others for their passive-aggression,
>>> you should probably try to use less of it yourself. Glass houses and all...
>>> *
>>
>>
>> Revisit the beginning of the thread. I didn't admonish anyone for
>> passive-aggression, Nacin did. I only took issue with the fact that Nacin
>> called me out for something most of us are guilty of. If anything, I
>> defended passive-aggression.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>
>>> This is probably the point where I say that, for me at least, this thread
>>> has run its course, and as it currently stands, I don't think I'll have
>>> anything else constructive to add.
>>>
>>> I don't look at Otto's mention of 8 rather disparate people all agreeing
>>> on an issue as being an appeal to authority*, but rather a matter of 8 out
>>> of 9 voices discussing this particular topic all agreeing. It could be that
>>> everyone else on the mail list has simply ignored this thread, and thus are
>>> not speaking in agreement with your position; alternatively, it could be
>>> that the majority actually disagrees with you.
>>>
>>> In other words: 89% of the people participating in this thread disagree
>>> with your position.
>>>
>>> And speaking for myself personally: with respect to consideration of
>>> WordPress "best practices": I defer strongly to Nacin, Otto, Scribu, and
>>> Dion. They eat, drink, sleep, and breathe the WordPress codebase. I respect
>>> their opinions and expertise on such matters. There are certainly times that
>>> I disagree with them on WordPress issues, but their arguments simply carry
>>> more weight. (Here's where the concept of meritocracy applies.)
>>>
>>> As far as this list goes, and the WPTRT in general, all input is
>>> welcomed. This list exists in order to solicit input from the Theme
>>> developer community. But you'll find that the WPTRT operates within certain
>>> principles that, while not entirely immutable, are only likely to be changed
>>> with extremely persuasive arguments and extensive agreement within the Theme
>>> developer community.
>>>
>>> One such principle is that Themes and Plugins serve different purposes,
>>> and that some functionality is appropriate for one or the other, but not
>>> both. While the exact differentiation is certainly subject to
>>> interpretation, any Theme functionality that deviates considerably from
>>> presentation of content is going to come under heightened scrutiny. Further,
>>> functionality that involves site administration, security, optimization,
>>> etc. - and especially such functionality that should persist regardless of
>>> what Theme is currently in use - is generally going to be deemed to be
>>> "Plugin territory".
>>>
>>> Thus, Otto's comment about recognizing that a "Theme is a Theme" is both
>>> valid and relevant.
>>>
>>> Another such principle is that what is acceptable/appropriate for private
>>> Themes may not be appropriate for a Theme intended for general, public
>>> distribution. Again: the exact differentiation is subject to interpretation.
>>>
>>> Thus, Otto's statement that Themes should not use ob_cache does not apply
>>> to Themes in general, but rather is made in the context of what is
>>> appropriate for Themes intended for general, public distribution.
>>>
>>> I should also point out: most of what you see on this list represents the
>>> opinion of the speaker only. Nothing you read becomes matter of "official"
>>> WPTRT policy until you see such statements in conjunction with the terms
>>> "Guidelines" and "required", and followed up by related posts on the
>>> make.wordpress.org/themes site, and changes to the Theme Review Codex
>>> page. So, don't interpret academic/theoretical discussions or personal
>>> opinions as declarations of Theme Review requirements.
>>>
>>> Thus, statements made in this thread, by me, Otto, Nacin, Scribu, Dion,
>>> Justin, Simon, and Ryan merely represent opinions, and personal
>>> contributions to an ongoing discussion.
>>>
>>> Chip
>>>
>>> * Though, if you knew the history and the wildly disparate experience,
>>> involvement, and viewpoints of the particular 8 people, and the nature of
>>> past disagreements, you would likely be equally amazed at such conclusive
>>> agreement on this issue.
>>>
>>> p.s. if you're going to admonish others for their passive-aggression, you
>>> should probably try to use less of it yourself. Glass houses and all...
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Darren Slatten <darrenslatten at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> *Look, if you can't even agree on the simple fact that a theme is
>>>>> supposed to be a *theme*, then this discussion is getting into the
>>>>> "pointless" territory pretty darned fast.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Invalid and irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *The only person I see being "pretentious" here is you. Nothing but
>>>>> long
>>>>> endless diatribes about how your code is right and everybody else who
>>>>> disagrees with you is wrong.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've cited sources where necessary and relied on simple principles of
>>>> logic to rebut invalid arguments. I believe I am right, but I do not
>>>> assume I am right, and I do not build my arguments on assumptions that I
>>>>
>>>> am right. It is for these reasons that I am not pretentious.
>>>>
>>>> My responses are only as long as is necessary to adequately explain my
>>>> views. This requires considerably more effort than, say, expressing
>>>> one's opinions as facts and providing no explanation or reasoning.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *I would point out that the people disagreeing with you are core
>>>>> developers, admins of the theme review system, design experts, and
>>>>> people like me who are just plain all-around-general-know-it-alls
>>>>> (thank
>>>>> you very much), but then you'd probably just take that as some kind of
>>>>> appeal to authority or something.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your argument is a textbook example of invalid reasoning based on a
>>>> logical fallacy that's been understood and documented for hundreds of
>>>> years. It's not like I'm making this stuff up. And don't forget: I'm not
>>>>
>>>> saying "everyone is wrong"--I'm only saying *"Yes-huh...you can even go
>>>>
>>>> ask Andrew Nacin!"* is not a valid argument.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *At some point, you're simply going to have to sit down and say to
>>>>> yourself "hey, why are all these people, who really do know things and
>>>>> are widely considered to be experts, disagreeing with me?"
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I disagree. Solving problems requires facts and logic. The people
>>>> involved are irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Maybe it's because you haven't explained your reasoning properly.
>>>>> That's
>>>>> a possibility, certainly. I would have to say that nothing you've
>>>>> stated
>>>>> makes sense to me, even though you continually state that you've
>>>>> explained something already.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't want to waste everyone else's time recapping what's already been
>>>>
>>>> said, but if you'd like, I can email you privately and try to get you up
>>>>
>>>> to speed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *On the other hand, perhaps you're just going to have to accept the
>>>>> fact
>>>>> that, you know what? You might just be wrong. I know, shocker there,
>>>>> but
>>>>> it is a possibility that you're going to have to face up to at some
>>>>> point.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (Reducing this issue to terms of "I'm right and you're wrong" feels
>>>> selfish and primitive, but I'll humor you anyway.)
>>>>
>>>> I don't mind being wrong. I actually appreciate being proven wrong,
>>>> which is why I constantly offer specific examples (easiest to disprove).
>>>>
>>>> I went as far as to write example code--essentially handed everyone a
>>>> loaded gun--and yet all I got in return was a bunch of limp excuses,
>>>> invalid reasoning, and best practices straight from the "in a perfect
>>>> World" cookbook.
>>>>
>>>> At this point, I'm not even sure what you're arguing
>>>> for or against. As far as I can tell, you're just butthurt that the new
>>>> guy spoke without paying his respects to your circle-jerk of
>>>> "collaborators" and you need to vent. But who knows, maybe you've got a
>>>> secret stash of valid arguments that you've been withholding. If
>>>> so, please use them to "prove me wrong."
>>>>
>>>> Here's a reminder of what's (supposedly) being argued. You can add to
>>>> the discussion by providing information that supports the first set of
>>>> claims or refutes the second set of claims:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Otto et al:*
>>>>
>>>>    - Themes must not use output buffering.
>>>>    - There is no reason for a theme to use output buffering.
>>>>    - Themes should not allow users to modify the behavior of plugins.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Darren:*
>>>>
>>>>    - Themes should be permitted to use output buffering.
>>>>    - There are some cases where output buffering is the only solution.
>>>>    - There are some cases where theme-implemented output buffering is
>>>>    the best solution.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *However, whenever I see a thread where Me, Nacin, Chip, Dion, scribu,
>>>>> Justin Tadlock, Simon, and Ryan Hellyer are all actually *agreeing*
>>>>> about something, then I'd have to say that that is pretty darned
>>>>> unusual. So, it's a point that you just might have to consider.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's not a point. That's an irrelevant observation. Unsupported
>>>> opinions, conceived under rare conditions, are still unsupported
>>>> opinions. Do you really expect me to intentionally remove functionality
>>>> from my theme, because 8 people (I don't personally know) share the same
>>>>
>>>> unsupported opinion?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Your solutions don't even solve the problem, as I see it, they only
>>>>> create new ones. Output buffering? I mean, come on. Do you really
>>>>> think it's better to delay sending content to the page so you can run
>>>>> a bunch of string manipulation code to modify it, as opposed to simply
>>>>> creating the content you want correctly in the first place?
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This has all been addressed already. Please stop polluting this thread
>>>> with more of the same invalid arguments I've already addressed. You're
>>>> making it difficult for others to follow the real issues.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Look, running a website, and especially optimizing one, involves more
>>>>> than just changing the source code of the page. If you're going to
>>>>> serve things up to the public, there's more to it than *just*
>>>>> WordPress. Being a webmaster is a full time job for some people. There
>>>>> is arcane knowledge that you have to learn. And sometimes, that
>>>>> knowledge lies outside your sphere.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cool story, bro.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *If you don't know to set caching headers properly, then you should
>>>>> learn it instead of trying to do optimization in other places that
>>>>> won't even help you nearly as much.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cool.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *This is kinda like all those CSS-compression things I continually see
>>>>> people trying to do. If you haven't even gotten the browsers looking
>>>>> at your website to cache the data properly, then compressing your CSS
>>>>> doesn't make a lick of difference if they're still downloading it
>>>>> every single time. You're optimizing the wrong things. Focus on the
>>>>> basics first. You only have to resort to the silly ideas like CSS
>>>>> compression once you've exhausted the traditional, and
>>>>> tried-tested-true, options.
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For a site like ottopress.com, which takes more than 10 seconds to load<http://www.webpagetest.org/result/110703_H0_f437e481696e55bb6b01c73d3a558037/>,
>>>>
>>>> the benefits of minifying CSS may be difficult to see. For a site like
>>>> seomofo.com, which loads in under 2 seconds<http://www.webpagetest.org/result/110703_YD_a5d3672cb3873083dd8dc0fa83ffda79/>,
>>>> the benefit would
>>>> be relatively more significant. Some webmasters just have higher
>>>> standards
>>>> than others, and as a theme developer, I try to accommodate the needs of
>>>>
>>>> both types.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -Darren Slatten
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>

-- 
-Darren Slatten
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20110703/f21f0c22/attachment-0001.htm>