[theme-reviewers] Drop-in code library and public namespace

[Chip Bennett]

Right. We do need to use common sense here. :) If "placeholder" functions
intended to be filtered is properly filtered, such that the actual
namespacing used is correct, then there's no reason to fail the
"placeholder" functions. (The propriety of such "placeholder" code is
debatable, but IMHO outside of our scope.)


On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Slobodan Manic <slobodan.manic at gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks to everyone who chimed in.
>
> I will definitely add notes on theme's usage of Customizer Boilerplate
> before submitting the updated version.
>
> Also, it's only function prefixes that are different and relevant. There's
> also an array of sample options in this file in Customizer Boilerplate<https://github.com/slobodan/WordPress-Theme-Customizer-Boilerplate/blob/master/customizer-boilerplate/options.php>,
> "using" 'my_theme_textdomain' translation string, but those are just sample
> options and are not meant to be translated, but simply overwriten in themes
> function.php file.
>
> ---
>
> Slobodan Manic
> WordPress developer at *ThematoSoup* <http://thematosoup.com/>
> Twitter: *@slobodanmanic* <https://twitter.com/#!/slobodanmanic>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The premise behind the namespace guidelines are to help insure a few
>> things, one being theme uniqueness.
>> In this case, given the "drop-in" and the theme are by the same
>> author, the issue of namespace clashing should be moot.
>>
>> I would be able to accept this namespace difference, perhaps adding a
>> note to the theme's documentation explaining the difference /
>> relevance would be helpful.
>>
>> Also, as noted by @Daniel, this issue has already been addressed and
>> "drop-in" libraries are fine to use, especially since this one appears
>> to use a unique prefix as its namespace.
>>
>>
>> Edward Caissie
>> aka Cais.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:21 AM, Abhik Biswas <abhik at itsabhik.com> wrote:
>> > I must have missed that.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Daniel Tara <contact at onedesigns.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> That is not true. Frameworks are allowed to be used unaltered; that's
>> he
>> >> whole point of using frameworks anyway. This has been discussed before
>> >> (several times) and has been deemed acceptable. See here:
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://make.wordpress.org/themes/2012/03/14/theme-frameworks-and-namespacing-guidelines/
>> >>
>> >> Daniel
>> >>
>> >> On Mar 5, 2013, at 8:45 AM, Abhik Biswas wrote:
>> >>
>> >> As long as I know, themes are *required* to use its name's slug as the
>> >> callback prefixes. Therefore,  if you are using a prefix that's not
>> your
>> >> theme's name slug, might colide with other callbacks. Also, all the
>> callback
>> >> prefixes in a theme should be same and unique. You can not use
>> different
>> >> prefixes in a single theme.
>> >>
>> >> A veteran reviwer can clarify it better than me.
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >>
>> >> 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/20130305/ae5c5dd3/attachment-0001.htm>