[theme-reviewers] Author URI q

Chip Bennett chip at chipbennett.net
Tue Feb 21 22:23:01 UTC 2012

I could buy into that, provided that the extra options pages are added via
add_appearance_page(). I still think that top-level menu entries should be
treated on a case-by-case basis, and generally represent innovative,
extended functionality.


On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 4:14 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Sayontan Sinha <sayontan at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I took a look at the ticket: this theme asks for an exception on
> > add_submenu_page() because plugins rely on it. Is that permissible? Why
> > wouldn't plugin authors create their own top-level menu instead of
> relying
> > on the theme's? I can foresee a situation where several theme authors
> might
> > request this as an exception saying that they have ancillary plugins
> > developed by others, and the plugin developers rely on a top-level menu
> > required by the theme.
> Actually, I've always thought that rule was a bit too tight and could
> do with some loosening up a bit. There's no technical reason to
> restrict theme authors into one-and-only-one menu item, for example.
> I don't much like themes (or plugins) adding top level menus myself,
> but I don't see anything particularly bad about a theme adding more
> than one submenu under Appearance, for example. Grouping different
> sets of related functionality into better places for example. Too many
> themes try to implement tabbing or some such to shove everything onto
> one page, which isn't very user friendly.
> -Otto
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120221/35242a8a/attachment.htm>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list