[theme-reviewers] Thesis WP Theme

Fri Jul 22 23:31:15 UTC 2011

>
> *Even better, would be a differentiation between Plugin-territory SEO
> (rewriting Post Titles, filtering tags, removing core filters, etc.) and
> Theme-related SEO.
> *

I don't know if I'm qualified to answer this, because my personal views on
"Plugin territory vs. Theme territory" seem to be different from everyone
else's, SEO-related or not. So perhaps the first step here would be for me
to try to get a better understanding of the WPTRT's philosophy on this?

The fundamental difference in perspectives--as far as I can tell--can be
summarized by answering the question: "What is the ideal WordPress Theme?"

Personally, I would say something like:

*The ideal WordPress Theme would be a really complex Theme (in terms of
> features, without sacrificing usability) that tries to provide the options
> and flexibility necessary to accomplish anything and everything. Default
> appearance is minimalistic, and the Theme is mostly concerned with content
> **structure. Design and presentation enhancements are handled by Child
> Themes. For most users, Plugins are **not necessary, as most of the common
> Plugin functionality is already integrated with the Theme. A theme that
> natively supports a certain feature set is more robust than one that
> requires multiple Plugins (from a variety of developers) to work together.
> *

But based on past discussions, it sounds like the WPTRT philosophy is more
like this (?):

*The ideal WordPress Theme would be a simple theme that provides basic
> functionality and focuses on the presentation layer. For most users,
> achieving their desired functionality will require installing at least a few
> Plugins. Child Themes are largely unnecessary, as most of the design
> elements are handled by the Parent Theme. A theme that tries to natively
> support too many features is difficult to review, difficult to maintain, it
> increases security risks, and it makes the task of switching Themes more
> difficult for users.
> *

BTW...I'm not suggesting either viewpoint is right or wrong; I'm only
mentioning mine for the sake of contrast and to provide examples of what
information I'm asking for. In other words, I'd be happy to make some
recommendations, but I want to make sure I'm creating something the WPTRT
will actually use (i.e., something that won't immediately be rejected based
on philosophical differences).

So, to reiterate, I'm not asserting anything and I'm not trying to argue my
personal viewpoint. I'm just asking for the WPTRT's "official" viewpoint so
I don't start down the wrong path (again).

*Summary:*

Can someone tell me what criteria is used to determine whether a given
feature/functionality should be handled by a Theme or a Plugin (or a Child
Theme)?

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:29 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:

> Darren,
>
> You know what I personally would appreciate reading? A post that lays out,
> concisely and straight-forward, the meaningful things that WordPress Themes
> should address with respect to SEO. Even better, would be a differentiation
> between Plugin-territory SEO (rewriting Post Titles, filtering tags,
> removing core filters, etc.) and Theme-related SEO. Getting your perspective
> on that would probably be quite useful to the readers of this list.
>
> Chip
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Darren Slatten <darrenslatten at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Chip,
>>
>> Thank you for your constructive feedback. I agree that it comes across as
>> a rant (which is more or less the de facto tone of the posts on that blog),
>> but at the same time, there is an underlying message that I believe is
>> aligned with the fundamental purpose of the WPTRT: to protect WordPress
>> users from bad themes by promoting good themes. Sure, the WPTRT has specific
>> tasks to carry out, but in my opinion, those are the means; the end is a
>> better experience for WordPress users.
>>
>> I strongly believe that Thesis is harming consumers and the WordPress
>> community as a whole. Therefore, regarding whether or not a link to my post
>> was appropriate for this mailing list, I based my decision on its general
>> relevance--not its outward usefulness. Honestly, I expected this group to
>> immediately object to anything with my name on it. But those who take the
>> time to read it will probably gain a unique perspective that very few
>> "premium theme consumers" have the nerve or the knowledge to expose.
>>
>> The post originally had a more-subtle pro-WP.org message--perhaps
>> overshadowed by the anti-Thesis shouting--so I've made a few changes, in an
>> attempt to even it out. I linked to the Theme Review guidelines, the Codex,
>> etc. Also, someone left a comment to the effect of:
>>
>> *"Thesis isn't bad. All themes and plugins generate error notices. Don't
>>> blame Thesis for WordPress core's problems."*
>>>
>>
>> Which led to the inevitable "Premium vs. WP.org" comparison. I think I
>> handled it well...although, admittedly, in a style this mailing list doesn't
>> seem to appreciate. ;)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>
>>> I would even go so far as to say that topics of discussion that are
>>> generally useful to Theme developers, especially in the context of Themes
>>> intended to be submitted for inclusion in the Theme repository, or general
>>> best-practices for publicly released Themes would be appropriate for this
>>> mail-list.
>>>
>>> But in this case, I would agree with Emil, Doug, Justin, and Cais.
>>>
>>> Now, if you'd taken the approach of, "this is an example crappy
>>> implementation of Feature X; however, here's an example of the proper way to
>>> implement Feature X", or, "hey, look at all of the noise this Theme
>>> generates with WP_DEBUG; but here's how to fix it", those would be far more
>>> useful.
>>>
>>> As it is, though, the linked post mostly reads like an anti-Thesis rant,
>>> which has dubious usefulness for the stated purpose of this mail-list.
>>>
>>> Chip
>>>
>>>  On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Edward Caissie <
>>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This mailing list is for the use of theme authors and reviewers for the
>>>> discussion of themes submitted to the WordPress Extend repository; and other
>>>> directly related items and instances.
>>>>
>>>> This list is not to be used as a traffic driver to items not related to
>>>> the above.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cais.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Darren Slatten <
>>>> darrenslatten at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If you're not interested, don't read it. Simple as that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Doug Stewart <zamoose at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but WPTRT doesn't review Thesis, nor is it hosted on the .Org.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -1, Off-topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Darren Slatten <
>>>>>> darrenslatten at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> > Emil,
>>>>>> > That wasn't shameless self-promotion. The post addresses real issues
>>>>>> with a
>>>>>> > well-known commercial theme, and I think at least a few people on
>>>>>> this list
>>>>>> > will find it very interesting.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Jul 21, 2011, at 6:03 AM, Emil Uzelac <emil at themeid.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Darren, please do not abuse the list any longer!
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Jul 21, 2011 5:07 AM, "Darren Slatten" <darrenslatten at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > If anyone is interested...
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I wrote a guest blog post about the Thesis "premium" WP Theme.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > How DIYThemes.com Uses Bullshit SEO to Sell Bullshit WordPress
>>>>>> Themes
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > --
>>>>>> > 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
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>>> > theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>> > theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>> > http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> -Doug
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20110722/dba3d139/attachment-0001.htm>