April 20, 2015 at 12:32 pm #4400
I have been using the git version (pre-2.0), and am in general pretty happy with it.
However, I found that I have less control over the styles included. Legacy stylesheets are broken down nicely into several categories (reset, images, etc), and I’ve typically used only the ones I need (usually reset, images, sometimes typography, maybe discussion) for a particular task.
But with 2, it appears there’s only one stylesheet? Does this mean I need to include my own reset, etc, now if I want it? Or am I missing something?
Also, any solid plans for a final release of 2.0?
Thanks!April 22, 2015 at 11:32 am #4403
You are correct, all stylesheets have been consolidated into one. That is, all the reset, images, typography etc styles that were previously in separate files are now sections in one big file. They have simply been moved together.
This is for performance reasons. Several files means several HTTP requests from the browser and that slows your site down.
This is the table of contents of the new file:
/** * Table of Contents: * * 1.0 - Reset * 2.0 - Repeatable Patterns * 3.0 - Basic Structure * 4.0 - Header * 4.1 - Site Header * 4.2 - Navigation * 5.0 - Content * 5.1 - Entry Header * 5.2 - Entry Meta * 5.3 - Entry Content * 5.4 - Entry Utility * 5.5 - Galleries * 5.6 - Attachments * 5.7 - Post/Paging Navigation * 5.8 - Author Bio * 5.9 - Comments * 6.0 - Sidebar * 6.1 - Widgets * 7.0 - Footer * 8.0 - Media Queries * 9.0 - Print * 10.0 - Legacy compatibility styles * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- */
While I realize that the sections doesn’t match the previous file structure, hopefully the new structure makes it easier to follow and find what you need. It was mainly adapted from the twentythirteen theme, but using Thematic styles.
The reset at the top is a version of normalize.css and due to it’s nature includes a bit of typographical structure.
You don’t need to add a reset if you use Thematic’s stylesheet. But unfortunately having the styles in one file means you need to copy-paste any sections you want to use into your own stylesheet if you only want some of the styles.
Regarding the release of 2.0, as far as I’m concerned it was finished in September 2014. Unfortunately due to things beyond my control, it has not been uploaded to WordPress.org for theme review and subsequent distribution. And I have no timeline of when that will happen either. That is up to Thematic’s original developer.
I will keep it updated on github since that is where I have access. There is not much more I can do.April 22, 2015 at 1:36 pm #4405
Thanks for the reply. Would it maybe make sense to add an alternative directory of the sections separated into files, so that we could include a few optionally?
In my opinion, this is a lot less overhead for development which trumps the server overhead, since then I don’t have to spend all that time working against the styles I don’t want.
Yes, I can copy what I need – but then any updates aren’t translated to my child theme.
For now, the legacy folder works – but is this going to stay? If so, maybe a better name/location for that folder would be good.
As for the official WP theme registry, if it’s been 1.5 years with no update, maybe it’s time to make a Thematic-next-gen entry? I hate this more than you do, but I also probably hate not having auto updates more than you do 😉April 22, 2015 at 4:40 pm #4406
If I would separate the sections into different files, I would do it while converting them to sass partials. Then you could use a sass build tool to build your css and only include the parts you need.
I disagree with you on development overhead trumping server overhead. Development happens before launch but the poor performance sticks with the site on each and every page load.
Slow page load is taken in account by search engines which impacts search rankings and thereby traffic and potentially revenue. Slow sites also have a negative effect on user experience and visitor retention which also have a potential revenue impact.
A future goal is to minify the stylesheet that gets enqueued and only bundle the full stylesheet for reference and development purposes.
The legacy folder will still be there for backwards compatibility. Otherwise, all old sites that reference those stylesheets would break. The only thing is that the responsive styles are only in the new stylesheet.
Regarding the WP theme repository, yes that is a possibility. I think that is what the original developer would like. Technically it would be a fork.
I dislike it because it would break the update possibility of all existing installations. Everyone would have to edit their child theme to change to a new parent. And there is no way to notify the existing installs that there is an updated theme under a different name.
To some degree people will have to touch their themes anyway. But I worked hard to create seamless upgrades with backwards compatibility. Forking means some of that work goes to waste.
The topic ‘Including stylesheets: difference between 2.0 and previous’ is closed to new replies.