WordPress Requirements Update and New Gutenberg Optimized Attribute

Yeah your comment pretty much covers it. Thanks!
Initially it was unclear whether the “Classic Block” needs to be styles the same as the other blocks or left in the “Classic” style (i.e. no styling at all), but it is true it makes a more sense to style everything within the Block Editor to match the front output.

As per the Theme Unit Test data, it’d be best to use some other method, perhaps custom made. There’s the great Block Unit Test plugin (created by Rich Tabor), but it won’t cover many of the markup related elements.

This is problematic for the review process at the moment, because the point of reference is quite outdated.
It means more work for theme author and for the reviewers, so perhaps fully covering only regular blocks and broadly covering the Classic Block.

Please add WooCommerce 3.5.X as well. It’s been a while since this list gets updated.

It would be a great if Theme Unit Test will upgrade it’s XML file with new Gutenbert blocks

HI @ StephenCronin
Please tell me if i 'm wrong:

  • if i want to choose Gutemberg to YES on my WordPress Theme, i need to transform all builder’s addons in blocks or to offer an option for clients to use those addons in Gutenberg editor?
  • If i set to NO or NA is ok only to have Gutenberg without issues/errors in theme?

In near future Envato will force authors to set to YES, so we need to create those blocks or this will be only our choise?

Ex: i have my page with paralalx, full width background, team addons, etc, Envato wants that we, to offer option for customer to make the same design(like with page builder) using gutenberg ?

I see that many of my customers hate Gutenberg (even i don’t have errors/issues with WP5 and Gutenberg editor) they want back classic editor (i know how to remove Gutenberg).

Cheers

@StephenCronin Thanks for your answers. Much appreciated :slight_smile:
Hope you will remove Gutenberg attribute for Codecanyon.

Hi All,

Firstly, you may be interested in today’s TF Search Boosting announcement for TF authors who have the WP Requirements Compliant badge. If you have questions about the search boosting, please ask them over on that post.

Now, on to some more answers:

========

@DAEXT @acmee - We’ve now had an discussion about the Gutenberg Optimized attribute on CC based on your feedback.

We believe users will recognize that the term ‘optimized’ means that the item has done something to integrate better with Gutenberg, and won’t see it’s absence as a sign that the item won’t work with it. The attribute will remain in place for now. However, we will monitor the impact and reconsider if we notice any problems.

I know that may not have been the answer you wanted, but we will keep an eye on this.

========

@hevada - The WordPress 5.0.x entry should be added to the Software Version field in the next day or so.

@mypreview - The WooCommerce 3.5.x entry should be added to the Compatible With entry sometime after that.

========

Yes, we’ll try to sort this out in the near future. Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks for your patience!

========

That’s not correct. I’ll try to explain:

If you want to set the Gutenberg Optimized attribute to Yes (for a theme), then you need to make sure the theme meets the Gutenberg Optimized definition. Basically you need to make the Gutenberg editor look like the front end, so that if users choose to use it, then what they see is what they’ll get (ie same style). You don’t need to make Gutenberg the recommended experience or convert builder addons to blocks. That said, it’s probably worth considering customer expectation. Some are likely to want to use Gutenberg, and the WP project will continue to improve it, so demand is likely to grow. It may be worth catering for these customers.

If you set the Gutenberg Optimized attribute to No (for a theme), then you don’t need to meet the Gutenberg Optimized definition.

In either cases (ie for all themes), you need to meet the Mandatory Gutenberg requirements. Basically, you need to make sure there are no errors, that the output of the core blocks look okay (and fit the theme style) on the front end, and that you’re not registering or blacklisting blocks.

That’s the situation for the forseeable future. We don’t have any plans to require authors to make all themes meet the definition of optimized for Gutenberg, although we do recommend authors consider that this is now part of WordPress and demand/expectations are likely to grow.

Hope all that make sense, but let me know if not.

========

Thanks everyone!

Also, a heads up: I’ll be off again after tomorrow for 3 weeks (until Mon 14 Jan). We may have others answering some questions while I’m away, but some of it may have to wait until my return. If you have any questions that you can ask today, then I will try to answer them tomorrow before I leave. And I’ll make it a priority to answer any outstanding questions when I get back.

So, we tried to make an older theme ready for the actual WP Requirements… the update got rejected for 3-4 times because the default installation doesn’t look presentable… On the code side everything is ok, Gutenberg mandatory requirements ok, all plugin territory functionalities ok but now, the reviewers reject the items for the default installation…

This way, the authors with + 50 themes to update will be blocked in a reviewing loop… Hey @StephenCronin is there a way to inform the reviewers that a particular update is only made to make the theme WP compliant and get the badge?

Updating the design on 3-4 years old themes is not a solution.

Hi,
Again thank you for clarification.
What i don’t understand is what you mean by
‘’ Basically you need to make the Gutenberg editor look like the front end, so that if users choose to use it, then what they see is what they’ll get (ie same style). ‘’

Do you mean if i use page builder with design A, on gutenberg need to look exactly the same?

Thanks

If you could please lodge a ticket saying attention to me, with some details, ie the name of the themes this happened for, I’ll look into it.

In general you shouldn’t have to change the design, but we do have a requirement that the theme should look reasonable and show content etc out of the box. Anyway, if I have some specifics, I can look into it.

========

You don’t need to make the demo content editable in Gutenberg, but you need to load the front end styles so that if the user creates new content in Gutenberg, it looks like it will on the front end.

If you install the latest version of Twenty Seventeen and edit a post, you will notice that the content in the Gutenberg editor does not look like it does by default. Instead it looks like it will on the front end of the website. Headings are styled the same, the same fonts are used etc etc. Twenty Seventeen is loading the theme styles inside Gutenberg so it looks the same as the front end.

Eg: This is what Gutenberg normally looks like:
image

This is what it looks like in Twenty Seventeen:

Which is the same as the front end of Twenty Seventeen:
image

That’s what we mean by optimised for Gutenberg. If the user edits content in Gutenberg then it should look like the front end. Ie you need to style the editor content to match the frontend output as closely as possible, including any fonts used and any dynamic styles coming from settings etc.

Hope that makes better sense!

1 Like

Now i understand.
Thank you again for your hard work.
I know you have to answer to many authors.
Cheers!

Great! There’s been a lot of confusion over this point, so I guess we didn’t explain it well enough. :slightly_frowning_face: Sorry for the confusion!

Okay, I’m off now for 3 weeks (until Mon 14 Jan). Keep asking questions if you have them. We may have others answering while I’m away, but some of it may have to wait until my return. I’ll make it a priority to answer any outstanding questions when I get back.

Thanks everyone.

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

I’m back now. I’ve reopened the thread in case anyone has any further question. Thanks!

Is there any timeline for assigning the badge? We have got the approval on Dec 22th and still waiting for the badge.

Hey, @StephenCronin welcome back!

We already have an opened ticket regarding this matter. The reviewers make the updates approval almost impossible. If possible please take a look at ticket #1360216

I’ve followed up on this one and your theme passed the check by the theme team (congrats!), but the plugin team need to check your plugin too. I can see that it’s in their queue and should be looked at shortly, but I can’t promise an exact timeframe - so I’ll have to ask you to be patient for a little while longer. Thanks and sorry for the delay (and for the confusing message once your theme passed).

========

I’ve had a look at the ticket. Looks like it hasn’t been as smooth as it could have been (sorry), but I can see you’ve been talking to Kailoon about this, so hopefully things will be smoother from here on in.

1 Like

I really appreciate your follow up on this.
Sadly, the plugin wasn’t much of a success and we’ve come to a difficult decision to retire the plugin as of today.

Hopefully, this will enable us to pass the queue from your end.

Thanks again!

Sad it wasn’t more of a success for you, but thanks for letting us know. We’ve activated the badge for you. I think the search boosting is turned on in weekly batches, so it could be up to a week before that kicks in.

1 Like