[theme-reviewers] Flash objects in themes

[Chip Bennett]

I actually elevate license information to an admin reference page, so that
it is more human-readable to the end user:
https://github.com/chipbennett/oenology/blob/master/functions/reference.php#L618

But here's what I put in style.css:
https://github.com/chipbennett/oenology/blob/master/style.css

And here is an example PHP template file header docblock:
https://github.com/chipbennett/oenology/blob/master/index.php

Chip

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Kirk Wight <kwight at kwight.ca> wrote:

> I love the simplicity of having all additional license declarations being
> in readme.txt, in one place (REQUIRED), and RECOMMENDing proper docblocks as
> Chip just outlined.
>
> On 15 October 2011 12:57, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
>
>> The overall Theme copyright/license is covered by style.css License: and
>> License URI: header tags, but other bundled resources need to be listed
>> eplicitly. I would recommend that license declaration be required to be in
>> at least one of the following files:
>>
>> 1) index.php phpDoc header docblock
>> 2) style.css header docblock
>> 3) readme.txt
>>
>> Best practice would be:
>>
>> 1) ALL php files have phpDoc header docblocks, that include @copyright and
>> @license. Derivative works should declare the copyright and license of the
>> original work, as well
>> 2) ALL php file header docblocks include @package: theme-slug
>> 3) All php function declarations should have phpDoc docblocks, and if the
>> function is copy-pasta, it should include @copyright and @license from the
>> original source, as well as an @link TO the original source, wherever
>> possible
>>
>> I've tried to implement these best-practices in Oenology, so if anyone has
>> any suggestions for improvement, please let me know, so I can update
>> Oenology's inline docs.
>>
>> Chip
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Edward Caissie <
>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Which goes back to my recommended documentation. Do we want to have the
>>> "explicit license declaration" somewhere more obvious, such as the theme
>>> description? or inline at the first instance of the "SWF" reference?
>>>
>>>
>>> Cais.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is a link to the human-editable file format acceptable for
>>>> repository-hosted Plugins? If so, that should be fine for Themes as well.
>>>>
>>>> But explicit license declaration is a must.
>>>>
>>>> Chip
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Considering that the theme author likely just used some other
>>>>> open-source package, then I'd say that it's fine as long as they
>>>>> properly link back to the source of the included code, and have links
>>>>> to any licenses that thereby are required. Said licenses must be
>>>>> GPL-compatible, obviously.
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally, I'm not so strict as to require that they include the FLA
>>>>> source, especially in a theme where the end-user likely doesn't care
>>>>> and doesn't need it anyway. However, an HTTP link back to that source,
>>>>> or to the project it originated from, should be there somewhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> -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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20111015/bc6ed894/attachment.htm>