1. Interesting stuff Jeff and Justin’s posts are easy to follow.
    At the momemnt I’m using the Simple Social icons plugin for my social network links.

    Thanks for sharing.

  2. For the record: while I would LOVE to see something like this as a standard implementation, we’re nowhere near adding it as a requirement to the Theme Review Guidelines.

    1. Good thing I used the word ‘possibly’ :) only a matter of time I suppose. Since you’re here, just a question I have. Is there anything within the theme review guidelines that might prevent a theme from being portable? Are there specifics on themes using Shortcodes or custom post types?

      1. Given the way things sometimes can get… taken out of context with the Theme Review Guidelines, I just wanted to clarify. It’s been mentioned on the mail-list as a good example of a best-practice implementation, but that’s it. If it gets widespread adoption, adding it to the Guidelines is a bridge that may present itself for crossing, sometime in the future. :)

        As for Theme portability: that is a very important consideration in the Guidelines. To the greatest extent possible, users should be able to switch from one Directory-hosted Theme to another with minimal impact – and with zero impact to user-generated content. So yes: the Theme Review Guidelines do prohibit Themes from including post-content shortcodes, and from registering custom post types, custom taxonomies, etc.

        The presentation-vs-functionality differentiation has been hotly contested at times, but I think we’re finally seeing inroads with both end users and developers understanding why it is best for everyone involved for Themes to keep as closely as possible to presentation, and to leave functionality to Plugins.

        1. Thanks for the clarification and insight. I would like to see you present a session on the topic of Portable Themes – Making sure end users don’t get screwed when switching themes.

Comments are closed.