[contrib] Textgarden = good, themes/templates = bad

hcgtv · 2006-11-30 02:28:56

NyteOwl wrote:

Those look an awful lot like the templates over at OSWD

Yes, most template developers upload their html templates to many sites, this particular person decided to take it a step further and adapt them to sNews.

The big news in the template world is that some of the admins who had broken away from oswd.org months ago and created their own site, openwebdesign.org, sold it to somebody who started placing ads into the templates available for download without the consent of the authors.

There are many nice templates available that can be easily adapted to Textpattern, but like marios says, we have to come up with a naming scheme to make it easy for all of us to participate in converting these templates into pages, forms and styles without overriding someone else’s creation in the user’s admin area. We have to get away from the thinking that it’s only one skin that exists on the backend at any given time.

jm · 2006-11-30 04:09:48

marios wrote:

And then it would be nice also, to have a certain naming convention set, as pointed out here, to ease the whole templating process and make it easier to work them.

Definitely. Here are a few ideas:

Re-use the existing textpattern forms and page names, if possible. So, default will be used for standard article display, maybe single for static pages, and so on. Then header and footer would need to be created too. Personally, I like _header and _footer as misc forms, since they’re grouped together.
Perhaps a plugin could be created that’d install the page and form templates. Wilshire did this with White ‘n’ Wild, so maybe that’s the way to go.

marios · 2006-11-30 15:35:59

marios wrote:

bq. jm wrote:

marios wrote:

And then it would be nice also, to have a certain naming convention set, as pointed out here, to ease the whole templating process and make it easier to work them.

Definitely. Here are a few ideas:

Re-use the existing textpattern forms and page names, if possible. So, default will be used for standard article display, maybe single for static pages, and so on. Then header and footer would need to be created too. Personally, I like _header and _footer as misc forms, since they’re grouped together.
bq. * Perhaps a plugin could be created that’d install the page and form templates. Wilshire did this with White ‘n’ Wild, so maybe that’s the way to go.

Seems, I forget the link

Some more brainstorming thoughts to what jm writes above:

Create a delimiter standard based on already used techniques to simplify the import and export mechanisms for both forms and pages.
Create a form identifier standard (misc, article, comment, file, and link forms)
(Allready implemented with Mike Wests mcw_templates)
Prepend a creator index (Three letter, like plugins) as a means to identify them against preinstalled default forms, that a TXP bare bone install relies on.
Check to see, what developpers have in mind with Crockery and ask their opinion about the subject, as a means to provide forward and backwards compatability.
Create an install routine draft, as a Uniform install procedure template, that can be provided to Template authers, just to fill in the necessary steps. ( sections, plugins, admin settings etc)
Finally package the whole thing up, together with the licenses (GPL, etc ), sample thumbnail, an example template set,
and the rest mentioned above and make it available as a download on TG for Template Authors to download.

Perhaps a plugin could be created that’d install the page and form templates. Wilshire did this with White ‘n’ Wild, so maybe that’s the way to go.

I saw this about a month ago, but I haven’t used it yet. Would be interesting to see, in how many cases this would work with any template set.

( I am not sure, if all the form types really have a distinct functional aspect in SQL terms, I think they do not, but I might be wrong, but I have seen, that the distinction both in the Form Builder and their availability in their file extension does make a lot of sense in practical terms.)

regards, marios

hcgtv · 2006-11-30 19:37:48

marios,

You have excellent ideas, I’m just wondering if we’re talking to ourselves here.

We have two camps at play here, those that feel that Textpattern is a kit you build from and those that feel that the user should be able to pick and choose his look from an array of choices.

Maybe we can get some more insight from the Team on this?:

Textpattern Pro
A content management system based on Textpattern, with additional features and services for web professionals and commercial sites.

marios · 2006-11-30 20:32:56

I’m unable to see a contradiction between the Camping habits of Individuals choosing different River Shores.
( I’m all for PRO, by the way)
Variety has never harmed anyone.
We are talking about Standards here, and without those, there is almost nothing that you can do, to have a working Set of Templates.
So far I’ve been doing these two things:

Contacted Team TXP for an opinion

Contacted Steward
(As he is the maintainer of TG and Author of the most ports)

to ask for opinions.

regards, marios

(We could also port the discussion over to TextBook, if this is more appropriate.)

regards, marios

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#13 2006-11-30 02:28:56

Re: [contrib] Textgarden = good, themes/templates = bad

#14 2006-11-30 04:09:48

Re: [contrib] Textgarden = good, themes/templates = bad

#15 2006-11-30 15:35:59

Re: [contrib] Textgarden = good, themes/templates = bad

#16 2006-11-30 19:37:48

Re: [contrib] Textgarden = good, themes/templates = bad

#17 2006-11-30 20:32:56

Re: [contrib] Textgarden = good, themes/templates = bad

Board footer