Theme Standards System

[nathanrice]

How do you compare the Manifest WordPress Theme with the Agregado Theme?

You don't. With the possible (likely) exception of the "total rating" I mentioned above, using a 10 point scale to describe the quality/existence of certain features (code, design, features, etc.) is a great way to compare themes like the two you mentioned.

Agregado would score high on the feature scale, and Manifest would score low. But that doesn't make Agregado better than Manifest. It just means it has less features. Some people might not be looking for a theme with a lot of features, so a low "features" score won't matter to them.

That isn't to say that a summary at the end of every review wouldn't be a good addition. I fully plan on including some final thoughts in the form of what some might call "opinion" for ever review I participate in, and I will encourage other reviewers to do the same.

"Though this theme may lack in features, it's solid, well built, and the code is well commented, making it an easy theme to customize if you are comfortable editing CSS."

That review is very positive, even though it might not have gotten a 10 out of 10 in every category. I think both review methods are valuable, and therefore, I will probably use both in my reviews.

Nathan

[ianstewart]

Maybe it's a language thing. I don't think themes without features "lack" features. Some themes have header image uploads. Some don't.

[ianstewart]

Manifest scoring low on a "feature" scale gets at my point. It implies that Agregado is better than Manifest in some way when it's just different. There's a different intent. Comparing the number of "features" misses the point.

It's like saying the White Stripes score 0 on the Bass scale while Primus scores 10. How does applying the Bass scale here tell us how much replay value there is in any White Stripes or Primus album?

What is this theme for? And does it succeed in it's goals? Those are the questions to ask in judging a theme. If it's a "magazine" theme or a "personal" theme then you look at what "features" it has and how those features help or hinder it in it's goals.

And I would imagine no one thinks "I need a theme with lots of features". More likely is "I need a theme that makes my soul-bearing online diary look more important" or "I need a theme that makes my blog look more like a professional magazine".

[dancole]

There are two ways of looking at themes, from a user's point of view and one of a developer's. If we take the point of a user, then we would want to focus on the goal of the theme and how its features help meet that goal, in which case I see opinionated reviews as the best way.

On the other hand, it would be good to point out to theme developers about what features are out there and what features their theme(s) have. I see the best way of doing this in a table fashion with black and white questions which are either answered with a yes or no, or some numeric value. This could be also valuable to some users who are looks for particular features.

[nathanrice]

Ian,
It's not my job (as a reviewer) to sell these themes. All I'm trying to do is provide a factual review of the theme. And for me, I judge themes (generally) on the 5 categories I mentioned above. (with the possible addition of Originality, as Ozh mentioned).

So, all I want is for the readers of WPThemeCritic is for them to understand what it is they're getting before they download or purchase. It's honest to give a theme a 1 out of 10 for features when it includes no Theme Options, no Custom Header Uploader, etc.

For instance, at WeblogToolsCollection a couple days ago, this free theme was announced:
http://demo.wordpressweekly.com/?wptheme=DarkCherry

From what I can tell from a quick look through the code...

1. it's poorly commented, markup and CSS
2. the design is uninspired, but not "ugly" (I've seen ugly themes)
3. It lacks any backend features that would help make setup/use easier
4. Probably works out of the box, but modifications would be difficult because they chose to employ single-line CSS style and hardly any inline comments
5. Support looks non-existant (maybe a little in the comments, if you're lucky).

It's not original, either.

Then, there's Manifest ...

1. CSS is commented well, and the markup is well done (microformats, etc.). Markup isn't very well commented though, but it's not hard to follow. Valid code. No errors that I can see.
2. the design is simple, minimalistic. (maybe a 2/10 on the attractive scale)
3. It lacks any backend features whatsoever. No support for IE6.
4. Easy to use. CSS well commented, easy to modify.
5. Minimal support in the comments. He fixed a bug, which is nice.

Not particularly original.

Truth be told, it's not a great theme either. But it works, and doesn't have any obvious flaws. It's free for a reason ... no one would ever pay for it. It lacks anything inspiring. It's lacks features. It's worth about as much an empty canvas. Great for painting on, but you won't see it in any art galleries.

Also an honest review. It states the facts. If you're looking for an original theme, with a great design, with lots of features, that's customizable, and has good support, then this isn't the theme for you.

It fails in most of the categories. But that doesn't make it a bad theme. It is what it is, and it's good at what it's good at. And after reading that review, that is the impression you'd get.

Nathan

[Laura]

I reckon if you're going to be setting 'standards', it would probably best to stay away from the subjective topic of design, as that is something that is ultimately down to personal preference. Whereas actual features, maybe having a list of, such as:

- customisable header
- multiple sidebar/widget support
- customisable layout

and then giving a point per feature it has, the more features, the higher the standard.

It seems like this has the potential to be the less subjective side of Nathan's WPThemeCritic. Some way of aggregating the ratings between the two could certainly result in an informed decision for a user.

[greenshady]

Sometimes, not having a theme options panel is a "feature" in and of itself.

[Ryan]

I agree about the five star rating system being flawed. However I do see merit in setting up a site which rates various themes and lists their features.

From my own purposes I'd be keen to see a rating for sites which use solid HTML/CSS techniques. Many (most?) themes have fairly shonky HTML/CSS which makes modifying them difficult. Finding a way to rate that consistently could be difficult as it would require someone with enough knowledge to actually look through the code manually. An easier system may be to perhaps rate it's support in a set of various browsers, ie: IE6, IE7, IE8, Firefox, Chrome and Opera and adding a note if they have used IE hacks (conditionals, invalid CSS or browser sniffing) to achieve cross-browser compatibility.

Information about whether they enqueue their scripts correctly and which JS frameworks they load would be useful too.

[nathanrice]

Sometimes, not having a theme options panel is a "feature" in and of itself.

It could also be argued that not having a stylesheet is a "feature" too.

I do get your point, but in my experience, it has become something people expect in WP themes, especially ones that cost money.

The percentage of users that would consider the lack of a theme options panel a positive feature is ridiculously small. They probably wouldn't read a review site anyway.

Me? I hate theme options. I don't need them. I'd rather code it myself. I'm also not the norm, and I've accepted that. Therefore, I have to assume that theme options = feature.

Nathan

[nathanrice]

Ryan,
All of those things you mentioned will be included in the criteria on WPTC. I think those are all important aspects of the code that a theme uses, and users should be aware if a theme does things in a substandard way.

Nathan