[theme-reviewers] Something we need to check for 3.4 appearance -> background

Otto otto at ottodestruct.com
Mon Jun 11 22:29:17 UTC 2012

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Michael Fields <michael at mfields.org> wrote:
>> - If the theme uses the core custom-background functionality, and also
>> specifies a background-image for the site in the stylesheet, then the
>> background image MUST be on the body tag, and the
>> body.custom-background MUST have background-image: none as a rule in
>> the stylesheet as well. This is to ensure that the custom background
>> image functionality works properly when the user elects to not have a
>> background-image.
> From my tests, it appears that the background image should not be added to the body via style.css. If no background styles are present in style.css and both a default color and image are passed as args to add_theme_support(), the feature works great.

Oh, agreed, which is why I wrote the rule to require both things for
it to take effect.

The whole thing started as a result of frumph complaining that the
background-image in the style.css (which he shouldn't have had there
in the first place) didn't take effect with the custom-background
functionality. So here's the thing: If you're going to have both, then
you have to require body.custom-background { background-image:none; }
in the theme as well, or it doesn't work properly.

Previously, core did this all by itself. Now, as a result of the
change in http://core.trac.wordpress.org/changeset/21054, it doesn't.
So, theme authors get the added burden to make sure this works
(instead of having core do it automagically), and theme-reviewers get
the additional burden of checking to make sure it's done right.

Not the outcome I would have desired, really. But there it is, and so
it has to be dealt with.


More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list