mozillaZine Forums

Hello mozillaZine readers,

This is my first post here and I hope I am posting this to the right forum.

I am the creator of the FOXSCAPE theme for Firefox. The link is:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/4083

I recently updated FOXSCAPE to version 3.02 and became concerned when it did not get put through to the public in what seemed to me to be a timely manner.

I then did some reading on mozillaZine.org and got the impression from someone else's experience that themes would not make it to the public if a reviewer discovered that the theme would not work on their PC platform. Of course, that would only happen if the theme was set as compatible for the reviewer's PC platform. It also sounded like the theme creator did not even get an alert describing that the theme was not put through for a particular reason. The theme just went into limbo.

Subsequent to reading this, while my theme was in the sandbox, I received an email from someone who had a Mac and they said that my newly updated theme caused the scrollbars to disappear. When I uploaded the theme I had set the compatibility to all platforms. I began to wonder if my theme was in the limbo state due to a reviewer using a platform other than Windows on which my theme has bugs.

This whole situation is really sad. I went through the process of creating a theme just as described on:

https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Creating_a_Skin_for_Firefox/Getting_Started

The content on the link above is apparently out of date, this can be seen in it's inclusion of the skin\classic\help directory which has been removed in 3.5 and in it's omission of the skin\classic\aero directory which was added in 3.0. It also makes no mention of the fact that the classic.jar file's original platform becomes the only platform that the derivative skin will work *totally correctly* with. I believe that this was a non-issue in Firefox prior to 3.0.

Now, as a result of what I understand to be a bug, described on the following two links,:

Classic Compact 3.2.0 by Ken Barbalace
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3699
(See: WHY THE NON-NATIVE SCROLLBARS)

Bug 423780 - Black border around scrollbars when using -moz-appearance: scrollbar
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=423780

it is the responsibility of the theme developer to create a theme that addresses certain peculiarities for each of the three main platforms. This basically means that the theme developer needs to test the theme on all three platforms while it is being developed. I don't know about others, but I simply have no way to test the theme on anything other than Windows. I wish that I could afford to have one or two additional PCs. (yes, I know about VirtualBox and Live CDs... just no free time)

I knew the bug described above existed back when Firefox 3.0 was released and had hoped that in the next big release (Firefox 3.5) it would be taken care of. That is why I had set compatibility to all platforms for the new FOXSCAPE. Unfortunately, things are not as I hoped they would be.

Firefox themes should be just like web pages in that they should render equally well on various platforms. So why can't a theme in Firefox be uniformly applicable (without fuss) across all three platforms? This bug should be fixed in Firefox so that each theme developer does not need to reinvent the wheel in the form of fixes for each platform.

Mozilla needs to improve their developer documentation. They also need to improve the status display and error reporting for themes (addons) that have yet to be made public. These changes should streamline the development of themes and eliminate any uncertainty in the developer's understanding of what is happening with their submission. I believe that the aforementioned improvements should be made prior to the release of any new Firefox browsers. The release of new Firefox browsers will only serve to further the need for updates to existing documentation. Again, they *really* need to get the current documentation up to date first.

Do you think my observations and ideas make sense? Is there anyone at Mozilla that could be contacted that has the power to properly address this situation?

Lastly, my theme finally got approved and put into the public area. I really want to make it work correctly on all platforms, if possible. So, understanding that my skin was created from the Windows version of the classic.jar file with only minimal .css changes, could someone provide a list of patches that could be applied to allow the theme to be cross platform? Alternatively, could someone possibly create a new theme from the Windows version of the classic.jar file and only apply the patches necessary to make it cross platform? The latter method would be the best way since it would provide a base theme for all developers on all platforms to work from without concern for the issues of compatibility on each different platform.


Thanks for taking the time to read this,
Michael Walden

Hi,
on the one hand,
you can fix the scroll bar bug very easy: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=906535&p=4756995#p4756995

You have then different native scroll bars code on Windows/Linux and Mac OS X and this solution works naturally perfect.

----

On the other hand,
a missing scroll bar on a Mac is only the most obvious bug.
Everywhere where a theme use native scroll bars, buttons, tabs, menus and so on .. has the theme then many other small bugs, when you use the code from the Windows default theme. (The Windows default theme(s) code has bugs on a Mac ... the Mac default code has many bugs on Windows and so on ..)

A perfect solution would be,
when you add as well a duplicate (from the Mac and Linux default) of the tabbox.css, radio.css menulist.css, button.css and so on ... nearly everything with an os_target solution.
Only then would it really looks and works as it should be. (Your theme looks now really buggy on a Mac)

---

Or you replace all these native stuff with a XUL solution.
The NON-NATIVE SCROLLBARS from Classic Compact are a good example therefore.
Themes like NASA Night Launch or Silvermel use for example everywhere XUL stuff. And only these themes looks and works on every system nearly 100% identical. But only these ..

---

Or you can build for every OS an own theme based in each case on the default theme.


Cheers

By the way,

Firefox themes should be just like web pages in that they should render equally well on various platforms. ...Is there anyone at Mozilla that could be contacted that has the power to properly address this situation?

The situation is well-known and already discussed with some Mozilla developer.
It is very very unlikely that the default themes will somethings works similar and without bugs on every platform. Let's face it: This will most likely never happens.

An improved developer documentation is naturally something different.

Cheers

Thanks Aronnax! for your reply messages. You provided some useful information. Though, this was not exactly what I was looking for. I wanted a solution that would allow me to blindly develop for Mac and Linux while working on Windows. I am looking for this since I have no way to test the theme on the non Windows platforms. I guess for now I will have to change my theme to support only Windows.

I also find it disappointing that no one else had anything to add to the discussion (so far). I guess the problems in Firefox development will just persist. Though, I can't complain for something that is free to download.

well, it seems to be a great problem to make a theme compatible to various operating systems/platforms.
i also use only windows (and amigaos, but there's no firefox for amigaos ), so i can only test on windows.
therefore i only can offer help in translation issues (well, at least i can try to... ).

Is not that no one else had anything to say about this. Is that most of us are tired to talk about these issues every couple of months. Mozilla doesn't seem to care as much as us about them or don't have the resources to find a better solution and document proper development guidelines for each new iteration. So we are at our own and we do what we can. I have a theme that works in all platforms the same but I test it in VMs when I can and have some cooperation from users using different platforms. You might want to open a thread here and seek help from such Linux and Mac users.

I don't think it is a problem at all. The theme system permits already that we use the flags to assign OS compatibility issues. I've firstly described how can it work here:
viewtopic.php?p=4753105#p4753105

and also here:
http://www.tudobom.de/articles/yatt/#flags

If the default theme doesn't use this approach is a matter from the default theme... I repeat: The default theme is just another theme. And again: make a theme is not "edit the default theme an change things here and there".

Firefox themes should be just like web pages in that they should render equally well on various platforms. ...Is there anyone at Mozilla that could be contacted that has the power to properly address this situation?

And it does! Like home pages you have also to look for browser compatibility. You can use a code for all browsers or use different css files for each browser. You can try to test your home page on all browsers, or simply try to assign the issues using the theory...

I think he was saying that pages render the same in different platforms not different browsers. A page looks the same in Firefox for MAC, Windows or Linux, or at least it's supposed it should.

And I disagree that you (themer) should program for each OS. If it's supposed to provide the same experience in all the available OS then it should as well provide the same development interface for themes (it's simple styling... you don't have to fiddle with OS APIs there like with some extensions).

DonGato wrote:I think he was saying that pages render the same in different platforms not different browsers. A page looks the same in Firefox for MAC, Windows or Linux, or at least it's supposed it should.

I know... But this statement doesn't make any sense... The responsible to render content is the browser, not the system.

DonGato wrote:And I disagree that you (themer) should program for each OS. If it's supposed to provide the same experience in all the available OS then it should as well provide the same development interface for themes (it's simple styling... you don't have to fiddle with OS APIs there like with some extensions).

Don't rely on native widgets and you don't need. But if you want to rely on native widgets, of course you do. The APIs for render native widgets are different from system to system.

I've decided my theme must look the same on all platforms, so I don't use any native style and my development efforts are target to this concept.

What you say doesn't make any sense.
We're clear that a page renders the same in the same browser across platforms?
Then why a theme shouldn't? That's what he states.

I don't rely in native widgets but that's not a panacea... there are long standing bugs that Mozilla doesn't care to fix. They should provide a way that WORKS in all platforms without the need for you to test and without bugs.

DonGato wrote:What you say doesn't make any sense.

Maybe if I say it in Portuguese? Would you make efforts to understand it?

DonGato wrote:We're clear that a page renders the same in the same browser across platforms?
Then why a theme shouldn't? That's what he states.

No, we are not clear. Pages look different in the same browser across platforms. Look at forms and try to think about why buttons look different on a Mac Firefox and on a Windows Firefox. Then you will understand why a theme shouldn't.

DonGato wrote:They should provide a way that WORKS in all platforms without the need for you to test and without bugs.

They already provide a way that WORKS in all platforms. Use the flag manifests.

DonGato wrote:We're clear that a page renders the same in the same browser across platforms?
Then why a theme shouldn't? That's what he states.

I don't rely in native widgets but that's not a panacea... there are long standing bugs that Mozilla doesn't care to fix. They should provide a way that WORKS in all platforms without the need for you to test and without bugs.

Native buttons for example have different sizes on different platforms and the native themes have therefore different code
When third-part themes should works and looks right on all platforms and the themer should not have much work is there only one way:
A theme must not have necessarily code for buttons, scroll bars, menus and so on ..
Firefox should use then the native code for these elements from somewhere else

It would need only a bigger rewrite from the whole theme system

By the way,
most of the cross platform Firefox Themes from Windows user looks on a Mac really really ugly. They build the themes clearly for Windows and add most of the time only some quick and dirty hacks for the most obvious bugs. I have always no idea, why they release these themes as well for a Mac

Oh, I forgot about that. That buttons and radio controls use the OS style and are most of the times not modifiable either by the web designers.

You're saying that they already provide a solution that WORKS in all platforms without the need for you to test and without bugs. The flags manifest doesn't provide that. You NEED to test in all platforms anyway.

DonGato wrote:The flags manifest doesn't provide that. You NEED to test in all platforms anyway.

You need to TEST ... yes, really unacceptable

Aronnax! wrote:You need to TEST ... yes, really unacceptable

i don't understand logic behind this post. of cause you have to test EVERY kind of software, etc. in order to ensure its proper functionality!
testing is nothing more than a regular development process. so where's the problem in this case?

DonGato, everything needs a test! I'm pretty sure you don't test every widget, every pane you are styling. And for sure you have code inside your theme that you have no idea for what it is... But I guess you trust that things are working, don't you? Why? Because you took that code from the default theme? With the flags manifests you will do exactly the same: take the code from the default theme.

@honx, does sarcasm mean something for you?

where's sarcasm? i postet just facts. testing is necessary. and it IS a regular development process.
so, where do you see sarcasm?

honx wrote:testing is necessary

Nonsense, all you need is .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzJ2NKp23WU

You're being childish now. Someone stated he doesn't have the means to test it in other platforms and it isn't ridiculous. You need paid software, maybe hardware and of course knowledge on those platforms. If Mozilla standardized the way themes are applied to their browser through the platforms it wouldn't be so problematic. It's just f*****g scroll bars for Christ's sake. You mean they don't have the brain to find a solution? I doubt it.

Anyway, my point in all this is that Mozilla could and should invest some time in standardizing the development of themes for multiple platforms. That was even discussed by them long ago and some internals even criticized their solution for the scroll bars. It's nothing new AFAIK.

DonGato, do you have some concrete proposes on this? We have pointed you a solution for the scrollbars and any other cross-platforms issues. You don't like it? Why?

DonGato wrote:Is not that no one else had anything to say about this. Is that most of us are tired to talk about these issues every couple of months. Mozilla doesn't seem to care as much as us about them or don't have the resources to find a better solution and document proper development guidelines for each new iteration. So we are at our own and we do what we can.

I see. I have not been a regular visitor to this site and did not know that this topic has been discussed to death. I was aware of the developer community being dissatisfied with theme difficulties from having communicated with another theme developer back when Firefox 3.0 was released. I hoped that this would have been addressed by now.

Do not loose sight of what I said in my message. I asked if there is anyone at Mozilla that could be contacted about this. Is there? Apparently there is since you said that they do not listen. Who in particular does not listen? I ask this since they must be made aware of the issue, possibly repeatedly, otherwise it will never have a chance of being fixed. Though, this still may lead nowhere.

Sadly, from the bits of information I have read about the coming Firefox, I get the impression that they are focusing energy on bells and whistles and not working on what is already there. I would much prefer a *well documented*, rock solid, secure, fast, standards compliant browser over a fancy piece of garbage. I hope they keep the quality up, otherwise users may abandon Firefox.

DonGato wrote:You might want to open a thread here and seek help from such Linux and Mac users.

I will consider that option.

Thanks for your input,
Michael Walden

There were discussions in bug reports at bugzilla. I don't want to search that bugs base as I never found what I wanted. You can try.

ShareBird wrote:DonGato, do you have some concrete proposes on this? We have pointed you a solution for the scrollbars and any other cross-platforms issues. You don't like it? Why?

I don't need a solution. I hate native scroll bars and don't use them in my themes, but I can understand why some people want to use them and so don't deny it could be perfected by Mozilla. It's simple, provide a cross platform solution for developers not wanting to use custom scroll bars so they can code in one platform and that works in all the rest of the platforms without the need of extra coding.

DonGato wrote:I don't need a solution. I hate native scroll bars and don't use them in my themes, but I can understand why some people want to use them and so don't deny it could be perfected by Mozilla. It's simple, provide a cross platform solution for developers not wanting to use custom scroll bars so they can code in one platform and that works in all the rest of the platforms without the need of extra coding.

So I. I also don't need a solution. I also hate native scroll bars and don't use them in my theme, but I also can understand why some people want to use them and so don't deny it could be perfected by Mozilla.

But I've expended a lot of time thinking about this issue, went work and figured out a way to solve the problem. Then I came here and shared this solution... You say this solution isn't valid and don't tell us why not. And complain... Just for complain?

ShareBird wrote:We have pointed you a solution for the scrollbars and any other cross-platforms issues.

Where? I didn't see a link on this thread or did I miss it?

Hi Frank, Aronnax! on the second post on the thread:

Aronnax! wrote:Hi,
on the one hand,
you can fix the scroll bar bug very easy: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=906535&p=4756995#p4756995

ShareBird wrote:Hi Frank, Aronnax! on the second post on the thread:

Hi,

Ah, these are what I was looking for - viewtopic.php?f=18&t=682635 and viewtopic.php?f=18&t=677195

That other link was no good to me, it just assumes that you already know what 'scrollbars and any other cross-platforms issues' you have. Which is difficult, if you do not see them on the OS you are on, same as if a user reports a possible bug that you cannot reproduce.

Edit - actually, those 2 links also assume that you already know (apart from scrollbars) what 'cross-platform issues' you might have.

Pity the poor new themer on this stuff!

mwalden wrote:I see. I have not been a regular visitor to this site and did not know that this topic has been discussed to death. I was aware of the developer community being dissatisfied with theme difficulties from having communicated with another theme developer back when Firefox 3.0 was released. I hoped that this would have been addressed by now.

Do not loose sight of what I said in my message. I asked if there is anyone at Mozilla that could be contacted about this. Is there? Apparently there is since you said that they do not listen. Who in particular does not listen? I ask this since they must be made aware of the issue, possibly repeatedly, otherwise it will never have a chance of being fixed. Though, this still may lead nowhere.

Sadly, from the bits of information I have read about the coming Firefox, I get the impression that they are focusing energy on bells and whistles and not working on what is already there. I would much prefer a *well documented*, rock solid, secure, fast, standards compliant browser over a fancy piece of garbage. I hope they keep the quality up, otherwise users may abandon Firefox.

Hi,
on the one hand,
40% of the Firefox code is from volunteer.
When you want a fix .. try it self

On the other hand,
the employee who do theme stuff work currently on Personas stuff for 3.6 and for this version would it be anyway to late.
And for the next versions are already countless theme changes intended and these then each for a Windows XP, Window Vista/7, Mac OS and Linux theme version. http://blog.stephenhorlander.com/

I have my doubt that the guys, who decide which bug becomes a priority think they have the capabilities to do this and have as well the time for a complete rebuild of the whole theme system. But you can naturally try it to convince these guys

And as already mentioned have i no idea, why some talks only about the scroll bar bug.
FOXSCAPE on a Mac: http://www.takebacktheweb.org/themes/stuff/FOXSCAPE.png
Or for example the Windows Default on Mac OS .. FOXSCAPE has naturally as well every of these bugs:
http://www.takebacktheweb.org/themes/st ... -theme.png

Only a scroll bar fix would be absolutely useless

Cheers

ShareBird wrote:Then I came here and shared this solution... You say this solution isn't valid and don't tell us why not. And complain... Just for complain?

If you can't understand yours isn't a solution but a workaround then there is nothing to discuss. Or should I tell you in Spanish?

You didn't :
1. Provide a single way (coding) of supporting scroll bars trough different platforms.
2. You still require people to test it in each platform.

The solution won't come from you but from Mozilla when they design a way to handle scroll bars in a standard way across platforms.

EDIT: here we have a reference to the issue and guess from when? 2003!

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=222654

And then you end in this...

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=379319

So, if it's solved why we still have issues using native scroll bars nowadays?!

DonGato wrote:If you can't understand yours isn't a solution but a workaround then there is nothing to discuss. Or should I tell you in Spanish?

No, you must write in Portuguese, I come from Brazil and, what a surprise for you! Buenos Aires isn't the capital from Brazil But that you don't know it is not really a surprise for me.
And if you can't understand this is a valid technique, why are you using a part of it in your theme?

DonGato wrote:You didn't :
1. Provide a single way (coding) of supporting scroll bars trough different platforms.

Here we go:

1. add these lines to your chrome.manifest:

Code: Select all

skin      os_target      whitehart    jar:chrome/chrome.jar!/os_target/common/
skin      os_target      whitehart    jar:chrome/chrome.jar!/os_target/mac/         os=Darwin


2. now delete the content from your global/scrollbars.css and just add this line:

Code: Select all

@import url("chrome://os_target/skin/scrollbars.css");


3. create two new folders inside your chrome.jar: os_target/common/ and os_target/mac/

4. create a new text file inside your os_target/common directory named scrollbars.css and copy and paste this into it:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/ ... .css?raw=1

5. create a new text file inside your os_target/mac directory named scrollbars.css and copy and paste this into it:
http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/ ... .css?raw=1

Done!!! (Nothing different as I've posted on that link...)

What I don't understand is why are you attacking me? All I'm doing is trying to improve quality on our themes. Trying to drive the discussion into a more technical level. Mozilla is still an open source and we can contribute with it, discussing, working and thinking on reliable solutions for our problems.

I'm feeling me like an idiot, expending so much time and energy for, at the end, have to hear people who I admire and respect telling me that these efforts are unwanted and not appreciated... I'm done with this.

Who is attacking who? Who made the 'joke' about writing in Portuguese when you already know I don't know anything about it? That I didn't reply doesn't mean I wasn't offended. I was returning the favor back there but you went ahead and insulted me and my country after that. It seems the discussion ends there.

Again, yours is not a solution. It's a workaround. You need two different codes in two different places. The solution would be for Firefox to provide a single file that works in any platform and that doesn't need to be tested. IMO themes should work the same across all platforms.

I praised your work at another thread but you seem to fail to understand here what the thread starter requested and what coincidentally I also think should be done.

mwalden, now you understand why I try not to participate in such discussions.

DonGato wrote:Who is attacking who? Who made the 'joke' about writing in Portuguese when you already know I don't know anything about it? That I didn't reply doesn't mean I wasn't offended. I was returning the favor back there but you went ahead and insulted me and my country after that. It seems the discussion ends there.

No my dear, I was just insecure if I should write "It doesn't make any sense" or "It makes any sense". I'm still not knowing which is the correct one indeed. . I have no idea which is your country actually... How could I insult it? I'm supposing your mother language is English and you were making a joke with my wrong English... So, a misunderstand? I do sincerely apologize. (OMG! Please don't tell me you're argentino! If so, I know what you have against me , just kidding...)

P. S. -

DonGato wrote:Again, yours is not a solution. It's a workaround.

May I ask you what do you think about the aero folder on the default theme (cross platform between Vista and XP)? It's a solution, a workaround or what?

That's a theme designed specially for Vista Aero interface. I get rid of it long ago.

Hi DonGato,
At first, thank you that you did accept my apologizes. I'm sorry, I misunderstood your quote... Now I know that the sentence "It doesn't make any sense" makes a sense at all

DonGato wrote:I get rid of it long ago.

That's the key to understand my concerns...

I didn't get rid of it. I simply didn't implemented it on my theme! And if I would implement it, I would never use the approach from default theme. In software development a switch is a better solution (maybe not much "elegant") as having to repeat codes, images and whole files... Maybe I'm wrong on it, I don't know...

"Theme Development is a matter of change things from the default theme" is an erroneous and quite dangerous idea.
I've been seeing here some absurd statements like "element xy is defined (sic) at the default theme on file foo/bar.css at line z". This is not true. Elements x or y are defined on the markup. It's a choice of the theme if and how this element will be styled or not. A choice of the theme how it will be selected.

Of course I have a look on the default theme to see how they solve a problem, how did they style this or that element. But exactly as I also see your solutions on your theme and the solutions from other developers. I'm always pleasured if people looks at y theme to investigate how I did this or that. That's the reason I use to have my code very clena with ton of comments on it.

The default theme is written by people like you and me. They have great and poor solutions. They make right things and wrong things, exactly like you and me.

So, please let's change this idea. I said this is quite dangerous, because even the devs are thinking we just work changing the default theme...

Our theme system is maybe a bit complicated (I actually don't think so), but it's very, very powerful! It makes really a difference when compared to systems like Opera and Chrome.

I guess we have to assume that Theme Development for Mozilla obligatory involves two components:
1. a graphic component and
2. a code component

I love to compare our job with this page:
http://www.csszengarden.com/

The philosophy behind it is to skin a HTML Markup using CSS Techniques and graphics without modifying the Markup.
It's a pleasure to click around the work from those developers and see how different and awesome can the same HTML look...
This is the way I understand theme development. We have a markup that we can't modify (XUL) (yes we can! File a bug...), and CSS, XBL and Graphics techniques to give appearance to this markup.

Both, graphic and code components are equally important, but let me talk a little about the code component.
The code component provides us much more possibilities as just change graphics and some colors.
Using the techniques that are available for us, we can really not only change the "look" but the "look and feel" from the applications.
The code component makes us able to write outstanding themes like we do.

Back to topic. Of course I agree with your idea. It would be nice not having to test my theme on all Operation Systems.
Just as example. A time ago, I did have a critical bug on my theme: it crashed Thunderbird on Linux at determined situation. I needed to investigate the issue studying the particular issues on Linux, supposing things and using my "third sense".
And of course, asking people to test it on Linux.
Thank goodness I can count with a wonderful community that helps me a lot, a lot! (Thank you guys so much!!!)

But I'm just concerned it is impossible...

No, you're not. While coding you always should avoid duplicating code because it doubles the maintenance. Your workaround is valid but it would be nicer to get a better solution by Mozilla. I hope we can agree on that. I never said your solution sucks or the likes, just that I expect more from Mozilla.

About the default theme being a base of most themes, I don't see anything wrong with it. The problem is that some developers don't try to understand the code and are enslaved to the definitions in it. I changed a lot of code from the original but I used it as a base of course. Starting from scratch would have taken that much time that I wouldn't be able to do it for free. In any case I started with a theme already released (in Firefox as Thunderbird was made from scratch) but with the 3rd iteration I decided to start from scratch again. It took me a while but I was able to learn all the code and tailor it to my needs. But not everybody is willing to put such effort in a theme. Some people just want to change some colors or icons. We can't condemn them, can we?

Nothing is impossible in coding... just that could be not worth it.

EDIT: lol... there three words that are quite similar, wiling, willing and whiling, of course all with different meanings. How nice are languages.

DonGato wrote:No, you're not. While coding you always should avoid duplicating code because it doubles the maintenance. Your workaround is valid but it would be nicer to get a better solution by Mozilla. I hope we can agree on that. I never said your solution sucks or the likes, just that I expect more from Mozilla.

...Nothing is impossible in coding... just that could be not worth it.

What I'm trying to point is that, and I can be wrong on this, maybe native widgets are outside of the scope from any application. I don't think that Mozilla (or any other application) can gain control over native widgets...
A coding solution could be the switch approach I'm proposing, don't know (I'm getting so old and senile that sometimes I think my ideas are just "delirium").
I've been wanting to file a bug for a while now based on this comment: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=496248#c15
I'm just waiting for some feedback from David to elaborate the idea better... But as I said before, it's a technique that already exists (I didn't "invent" it) and a matter of choice to use it or not.

DonGato wrote:About the default theme being a base of most themes, I don't see anything wrong with it. The problem is that some developers don't try to understand the code and are enslaved to the definitions in it

Time to change it?

DonGato wrote:But not everybody is willing to put such effort in a theme. Some people just want to change some colors or icons. We can't condemn them, can we?

No, this and the "fall back" problematic were the inspiration for the "light weight" approach I've proposed on the last post of this discussion:
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla. ... 8e3e8dc64#

But let's recall an old discussion on this Forum:
We need more themers.

Just quoting something interesting from that discussion:

There are creative designers and productions artists; web designers and web developers. The design people make pretty visuals and rely on the production people to implement it because they have no interest in writing code or whatever technical implementation. And the coders don't care that something is the wrong shade of red or that the space between the letters T and e are too far apart.

So, the way to get more themers making more good themes is to pair up the pretty-picture-makers with the coding-is-fun-folks. I believe the Gerich and Horlander team is a fine example.

Unfortunately I've seen here a lot of "Needing code" threads and never have seen a "Needing coder" thread.

Now we have 700 themes! We can't say most of them are really "good" themes. And besides the lack of time from developers we have another issue: lack of knowledge to make updates or deal with simple bugs. Many, many themes are abandoned because of this...

Look, nobody would expect (and even install) an extension written by someone without knowledge on DOM, XUL, javascript. Why should we expect a Theme Developer (or a team of) without knowledge on DOM, XUL and CSS?

As I've started with this for five years, I had no clue about graphics and all these stuff. I've learned a lot and I'm still learning. I do my very best to improve every day the quality of my work. We write software that is used from million people! It's a lot of responsibility!

I'm sure there are a lot of coding-is-fun-folks wanting to participate on projects together with pretty-picture-makers. I try to stimulate pretty-picture-makers to become also coding-is-fun-folks. It's possible...

To be sincere I just don't want to see pretty-picture-makers-not-wanting-to-deal-with-boring-code claiming changes that could end up with the end of a powerful system that makes a difference.

"Take care of your wishes, they can become true!"

Look, I don't consider myself a coding guru nor a CSS guru. Most of the times I learn a coding language because I need to fix what someone else did wrong or doesn't suit my needs or even to collaborate adding a feature to something I use and enjoy. I'm no expert in any specific language but I try to learn what I can when in need. The problem is not all people are willing to invest their free time this way. If it weren't that I use the themes I build I would have never maintained/coded them. They take a lot of time of my already busy life and they will keep taking me a lot of time, but I enjoy it and I need them for myself (really important point as I can't use the default themes because I consider them nasty).

As I build a simple theme graphics aren't a really big issue but I agree that the pairing of graphic designers and coders would be a preferred path. I never managed to get help from one in this project. In another project I managed long ago we had a really good designer and he made wonderful things. Someone from Spain I need to contact and see how is doing (you reminded me... ).

I would be glad seeing 100 or 200 themes that aren't just buttons swap or simple color changes, but that's me. I know a couple of themes with an identity but most are simply what you call "lightweight themes".

Yes there are hundreds of themes out there that are nothing more than icon swaps. And guess what, they are based on the default theme, and as such, they don't run properly on anything other than a Windows platform with few Extensions running. Just try changing something as simple as the Stop button and see how far that gets you with Extensions... I just can't wait for the extension builders to adopt the blue (really Mozilla?) Stop button from the Aero version of Strata... then everyone's Themes plus Extensions will be destined to just be flat-out ugly. Yes there are not enough good designer type people building themes... and can you blame them? I understand the argument... yes, a theme should be more than just new icons... the themer should take the opportunity to customize the code to suit his vision.... but what the themer should NOT be expected to do is to waste months and months debugging and fixing the BASE code just to work right. Especially since the likelihood of that person having personal access to Mac and Linux and PC boxes is basically nil. There seems to be this attitude that either there has to be no themes and Firefox will go with only Personas-style add-ons, or the theming community needs to just accept their role of completely reinventing the wheel in terms of every developer debugging and producing their own BASE. That's just flat out stupid.

For every single hard-core themer out there, there is a completely independently developed code base that they build their themes on. And while that may give uber-nerdy-ultra-programmers a big stiffy, it just makes me shake my head. If you give people a solid base in a default theme that works on any machine without adjustment and looks flawless no matter what it's running on, then everyone has more freedom. So what if it means there might be more of the icon swap themes? At least there will be more of the icon swap themes that actually run on any system instead of being projects that the developers quickly give up on because of the rediculously high level of frustration.

patrickjdempsey wrote: If you give people a solid base in a default theme that works on any machine without adjustment and looks flawless no matter what it's running on, then everyone has more freedom.

Ony curious.
Should Mozilla build and test every theme for every platform? (4X4 = 16 Themes)
Or do you want one for all and they should remove platform specific code?

Cheers

I think platform specific code is fine, after all, a Mac and PC and a Linux box don't have the same standards for how UI elements work.. (not that that is going to matter with NEXT anyway). And by four themes you mean the two current official branches and the two currently in development? No, I don't see why that would be needed for unfinished products, or for versions that have already been out for over a year now. The damage is already done there... but I think it's something that should be part of RC goals. I understand that memory leaks and security is the primary concern for the RC, but you can't tell me the guys programming the themes are the same guys fixing the memory leaks. If the underlying structure of Firefox has to be tested and run well on 4 different platforms, why shouldn't the skin it wears do the same? Obviously the Linux theme isn't going to run on any other platform because no-one else offers native icons, so themes based on the Linux theme aren't going to run correctly anywhere else anyway, so that's one to discount. I don't know anything about the Sun theme, but it appears to be based on the Windows theme, although it probably has some native Sun specific code? No, as far as I see it, there are two primary themes being used by theme developers to build from, Mac OSX Firelight and Windows Strata. And with the exception of a few native backgrounds, the Firelight theme runs almost flawlessly on a PC. I downloaded it, got the software to unpackage it and then jar'ed it up and tested it myself.

patrickjdempsey wrote: No, as far as I see it, there are two primary themes being used by theme developers to build from, Mac OSX Firelight and Windows Strata. And with the exception of a few native backgrounds, the Firelight theme runs almost flawlessly on a PC.

Still curious
For example the missing Firelight backgrounds.
It is because of Mac only code like:
-moz-appearance: -moz-mac-unified-toolbar; or
background-color: -moz-mac-chrome-active; or
background-color: -moz-mac-secondaryhighlight; and so on
and it can`t work on Windows/Linux.
Should looks these stuff on Windows as original intended for a Mac (for example grey) or should it have then a native Windows background?

By the way,
the four themes: two for Windows, one for Mac and one for Linux.

patrickjdempsey wrote:the Firelight theme runs almost flawlessly on a PC

this is not true

Cheers

patrickjdempsey wrote:the Firelight theme runs almost flawlessly on a PC

this is not true

Cheers[/quote]

The 3.0 version worked on my XP machine. I haven't tested later iterations on different machines. And oh yes, two themes for Windows... how could I forget the design genius that is blue closer buttons. The Aero theme doesn't even follow any Windows guidelines... it's just everything turned blue... I can't even believe they bother with it!

patrickjdempsey wrote:The 3.0 version worked on my XP machine. I haven't tested later iterations on different machines.

Only halfway and with countless little bugs.
When you don’t expect more than such a halfway compatibility from Mozilla,
then is it maybe possible to build the default themes cross platform.

But is then still crap and crap is useless.

Cheers

My whole point is that the documentation and the fixes for a vast majority of the incompatibility issues are right here in this forum. The only big problem that seems to be faced across the board is scrollbars, and that's the main thing Mozilla would have to work on... and even that could simply be fixed with a modification of -moz-system-metric to recognize and differentiate Windows, and Mac and Linux, or just make the Linux style into the default unless OSX, XP or Vista is detected. Oh, but that would make -moz-system-metric actually USEFUL for something... doh! Other than that, it's simply a matter of inserting the < 100 lines of code already tested by thousands of users every day. Sure, I've got that ironed out for my themes for now... but I know for a fact that already 3.6 changes the way some things render on Windows and I have no way of knowing if those things have changed on Linux and Mac, or if my fixes for the Windows changes will either not work on Linux or Mac or cause other breaks. Until I get bug reports from users, then come here to find a "patch", and hope it works with fingers crossed.

patrickjdempsey wrote: The only big problem that seems to be faced across the board is scrollbars, and that's the main thing Mozilla would have to work on... and even that could simply be fixed with a modification of -moz-system-metric to recognize and differentiate Windows, and Mac and Linux, or just make the Linux style into the default unless OSX, XP or Vista is detected. ...

Serious, use a Mac and spend some time with the Firefox themes on a Mac .. most of them are absolutely crap on a Mac .. bullshit .. and nothing else.

The only big problem ..

It bugs serious then you talk only about the most obvious bug and some quick and dirty hacks to make a Windows/Firefox theme for or a Mac or Linux more or less usable.
There are much more bugs! When you really want GOOD cross platform themes is there much more needed.

inserting the < 100 lines

A bad joke .. really.

By the way,
the discussion is anyway useless. You should try to convince Mike Beltzner:
http://beltzner.ca/mike/

Cheers

Well, so that's my whole point. How are individual themers with NO access to different OS machines supposed to create anything NEAR looking good if all they have to go on is the "patches" available here? If Mozilla is even concerned about this at all, which I pretty much doubt, they have three alternatives as I see it:

They could rewrite Firefox to truly be a cross platform program that renders all themes the same on all platforms. This sounds like a ton of work that would result in something that would probably end up making all kinds of strange compromises to where it doesn't look native on any platform.

They could keep the different versions of Firefox but drop the OS specific code in the themes so that the same theme would run on all platforms but look different because of the way Firefox rendered it. Again, you would loose the native look, but the themes would end up being much simpler.

Lastly, they could introduce OS identifiers, like I said before with an expansion of the "-moz-system-metric" stuff. With that method they could keep the OS specific codes, and include OS specific patches within the default themes, the same exact way that they currently use "-moz-system-metric" to include patches for the various PC OS's already. Of those three alternatives, this would be the one that fits best with their current model.

Again... We have already a way to make themes Cross Platform using the manifest flags. What is the problem with this?

patrickjdempsey wrote:How are individual themers with NO access to different OS machines supposed to create anything NEAR looking good

They you build:
1. a full XUL theme (a theme without native stuff)
2. a "light-weight" Theme viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1472225
3. a Personas theme

4. or they could ask a Mac/Windows/Linux user and add some quick and dirty patches for their Windows/Mac/Linux theme to make it more or less and quick and dirty Windows/Mac/Linux ready.
5. one theme for every OS (for example in each case based on the default)
6. one cross platform theme with manifest flags for native code
(really only something for hardcore themer with to much time)

-- --

1-3 will works very well and need not much time

4. is crap
5. a good option
6. a strange idea

----
Themer have already enough good options and Mozilla will change anyway nothing and i can’t see only one good reason (as a realistic option), why they should.

Cheers

Wow, this thread is very, very difficult to follow. Everyone either has completely different ideas, or has the same idea but is getting misunderstood due to language barriers, I'm not sure which. And I'm going to add a few more points to muddy things more. I'm just going to talk about Strata, I don't even want to get into talking about cross-OS theming until I reconcile 1 OS...

I know I've been frustrated with theming ever since tab-backgrounds were added. Now there are still ancient theme bugs, like the focus ring appearing on the sidebar close-button when it's active, which I think has been around since Phoenix .1. I was able to fix that for 3.5 with 1 css rule, but, behold! Something has changed in Namoroka and Minefield that makes that code break, and the fugly ring is back. Frustration.

To say that you can just drop in new icons to classic.jar is wrong. Just what are the dimensions of the Back button, or the unified dropmarker? Is that with the etching or without it, as the etching may or may not get removed in the future? Have you ever noticed that the default bookmark icon in the Bookmark menu isn't really 16px wide, it's actually 14px wide (I'm going by memory from 6 months ago, so I might be off here), but it's kludged 1px over to make it left-aligned with the folder icons, making it, what, 15px wide? The blood begins to boil.

What's up with having tag.png in browser/places (or, of course, aero/browser/places) but putting Bookmarks-folder.png in browser (or aero/browser) but then calling the identical images from mozapps/places (or aero/mozzaps/places) but renaming those images as tagContainerIcon.png and defaultFavicon.png? Steam starts emitting from the ears.

Does anyone know where unstarred48.png gets used? The eyes go bloodshot, foam appears at the mouth.

Is there even a sensible way to approach these issues with the Fx developers, or do we just wait till they make the next radical change in the theme structure and code?

hhh wrote:Now there are still ancient theme bugs, like the focus ring appearing on the sidebar close-button when it's active, which I think has been around since Phoenix .1. I was able to fix that for 3.5 with 1 css rule, but, behold! Something has changed in Namoroka and Minefield that makes that code break, and the fugly ring is back. Frustration.

I have never had that particular problem. You may wish to look at Aeon css to see why.

I'm sure any one of you could pick my gripes away, one by one, but that wouldn't deny my point, the point of this thread, which is the difficulty of implementing even the most rudimentary of themes, a simple icon switch in one OS.

-edit- Ed, you're right, check out other themes, and everyone, awesome points and links and arguments, but really,

What procedure?

ShareBird wrote:Again... We have already a way to make themes Cross Platform using the manifest flags. What is the problem with this?

Nothing at all. It's just that you need 2 components to make it work - usage of manifest flags and the OS in question right in front of you. This is really the point that Patrick is making, someone at Mozilla must have those 2 components, so make a classic.jar that works on all OSs.

Otherwise a themer is relying on code snippets that they cannot see the results of and screenshots that dribble in very slowly from users/wannabe betatesters, if at all.

For myself, Windows and Linux have never been a problem as I have those OSs. You tell me a problem on them with my stuff and I'll DOMi it and fix it in 30 minutes. For the Mac OS, apart from a scrollbar fix, I use a different approach, I use the approach from the Apple Human Interface Guidelines :

Apply the 80 Percent Solution

During the design process, if you discover problems with your product design, you might consider applying the 80 percent solution—that is, designing your software to meet the needs of at least 80 percent of your users. This type of design typically favors simpler, more elegant approaches to problems.

If you try to design for the 20 percent of your target audience who are power users, your design may not be usable by the other 80 percent of users. Even though that smaller group of power users is likely to have good ideas for features, the majority of your user base may not think in the same way. Involving a broad range of users in your design process can help you find the 80 percent solution.

I just apply the '80 Percent Solution'. The other 20%? I'll theme for 17% of those but the Mac OS has around 3% market share. You all waste your time if you like, theming by seance sessions....I know that I have more productive things to do with my time.

Frank Lion wrote:

ShareBird wrote:For the Mac OS, apart from a scrollbar fix, I use a different approach, I use the approach from the Apple Human Interface Guidelines :

Apply the 80 Percent Solution

During the design process, if you discover problems with your product design, you might consider applying the 80 percent solution—that is, designing your software to meet the needs of at least 80 percent of your users. This type of design typically favors simpler, more elegant approaches to problems.

If you try to design for the 20 percent of your target audience who are power users, your design may not be usable by the other 80 percent of users. Even though that smaller group of power users is likely to have good ideas for features, the majority of your user base may not think in the same way. Involving a broad range of users in your design process can help you find the 80 percent solution.

I just apply the '80 Percent Solution'. The other 20%? I'll theme for 17% of those but the Mac OS has around 3% market share. You all waste your time if you like, theming by seance sessions....I know that I have more productive things to do with my time.

the "Apply the 80 Percent Solution" from Apple is a guideline for usability questions and not an excuse to deliver a minority a cheaper quality.

And when someone has a similar approach should he please build the theme only for Windows/Linux and it should not be available for a Mac.
Anyway need nobody such crap themes on a Mac and it is only bad for the whole image from Mozilla themes.

Aronnax! wrote: "Apply the 80 Percent Solution" from Apple is a guideline for usability questions and not an excuse to deliver a minority a cheaper quality.

You kind of like playing a rigged game, don't you, Annie? First you try and lead Patrick around in circles, then you go out of your way to insult Sharebird and his manifest flags and now you even find fault even though I use the exact same approach as you do with Windows and Linux!

Many themers using Windows release their themes for Mac users to use. Why? ...because this stuff isn't all about 'me,me,me, naturally, crap,naturally, buggy, me, me'....the code is Open Source and Mac users can use the DOMi and fix any bits that bothers them. Who on earth are you to tell themers or users what to do!?

My Mac users seem quite happy with the way my stuff is, as downloaded. Maybe that's because people are different, like different things and are not as obsessed with Mac stuff as you are.

Keep trolling like this, Aronnax!, and I will be reporting you. You have already tried to ruin far too many threads in this forum.

Well, he keeps trying but as most of us know him already we ignore his comments.
I would advise you to do the same.

Don't know why but some users of my theme are using Mac OS and while I dislike the platform I can't do the same for the users so I try to provide a good solution for them even while it takes a lot of time/resources to do so. That Mozilla will help with that is a dream I think I will never see accomplished.

Frank Lion wrote:.. then you go out of your way to insult Sharebird and his manifest flags and now you even find fault even though I use the exact same approach as you do with Windows and Linux!

I would never insult Sharebird .. in particular not his "light-weight" theme concept. Which is naturally a variation of manifest flags, but maybe was it not clear enough.

Frank Lion wrote: I use the exact same approach as you do with Windows and Linux!

No, absolutely not. I have never released something for Windows/Linux. Because i release nothing only based on quick and dirty hacks like some other.

Cheers

DonGato wrote:Don't know why but some users of my theme are using Mac OS and while I dislike the platform I can't do the same for the users so I try to provide a good solution for them even while it takes a lot of time/resources to do so.

Yes, I didn't mean to suggest that I have a 'Let them eat cake!' attitude towards Mac users, haha. It's just that I have 8 or so non-native themes out that seem to work fine on Macs and the users seem happy enough and I'm not going to go around looking for problems, especially as I do not have a Mac OS to test on.

For example -



This guy wrote for Support the other day wanting a fix for the minimum height on my Tab Overflow Scrollbar extension on his Mac, as his tabs were being cut off. *

Didn't mention one single problem on the Metal Lion iCe theme that he has been using for 3 years though. (screenshot is his, not mine and a bit small, but you get the drift) Maybe it's a side benefit of my sprinkling -moz-appearance: none !important; around like confetti in my stuff (I do overuse it. ) to counter Windows native effects everywhere?

But, what I wanted to ask you, Don, was this. Your stuff is mostly/all non native, isn't it? What Mac OS problems do you get, roughly, not an exact list? How do you go about fixing them, I ask because I noticed you posting Mac screenshots. Are those from users or do you access a Mac somehow?

I realise that this thread is actually about default native themes, but.......



* should look more like this - http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/3219/sn0143.png

As I'm doing like you, using the "-moz-appearance: none" all around my theme and providing special styling for everything I don't have many problems reported. I use also custom scrollbars and fixed the issue I had with the preferences panel recently.

About testing, I relied on users by doing multiple test versions for them to check the results. No need to say it was a lot of work and time. Now I'm using a VMware image of Mac OS X I got from Internet (not so legal I would say). It runs slow as hell even while I have a good hardware but it's the only way I can check some things quickly. Considering I charge nothing for the themes and even while some time ago I enabled donations I realize I won't get more than a few beers from it so I'm not planing on investing money in test platforms so this will have to do. I also have Linux, Vista and more recently Windows 7 test platforms to check some compatibility once in a while.

That's why some help from Mozilla in giving a baseline compatibility would be great.

Hmmm.... What about maybe a test platform by Mozilla, where we could submitt a XUL file and have a screenshot how it looks? Something like:
http://browsershots.org/

Just an idea...

Well there are some really strange bits as well. I check my statistics at AMO specifically to see if Mac and Linux users are using my themes, and especially if they are actively using them. I've got hundreds of Mac and Linux users and aside from early versions that were not "fixed" to be compatible at all, and a few problems with Extensions (something I REALLY can't test for!) I've had virtually no complaints from my Mac and Linux users. Besides this LACK of feedback, the other feedback I get concerning Mac or Linux stuff comes from AMO testers approving new versions, and I seem to randomly pass or fail their standards based on who is testing and probably what mood they are in. The feedback usually comes in the form of one sentence, no screen shots, no suggestions. Obviously it is not the responsibility of AMO to make sure that every theme works on every platform, so who's is it? Occasionally my themes are picked up by Softpedia and they offer screen shots. However, once they have done a screen shot for a theme they will not update it unless the author requests an update, and it may take weeks or even months.

Why do I even bother to offer Mac and Linux themes when I can't test them? Basically because the way AMO is setup is that it favors universal themes. You have the option of offering a universal theme or individual themes for various OS's, but not the option of offering a semi-universal theme that excludes problematic OS's like OSX. So I offer my themes universally for the same reason I even bother doing them to begin with... not because I'm getting anything out of it directly, it's not like I'm getting paid or I expect to get offered a job out of it. It's because I figure, hey, maybe someone will like them and it will make their user experience with Firefox better. Isn't that all that any of us want? And that goes back to the root problem of this whole thread. It needs to be easier for people with design experience to drift into the Mozilla world and create something new and fantastic without dedicating endless months in managing code and debugging and testing for things that require access to systems they might not have access to. Cross-platform-compatibility is only the icing on a very large, very unstable cake. At some point Mozilla is going to have to completely reinvent the theming process, and not just for us, but for the sake of the program itself. There's lots of weird code floating around in the default themes, and as hhh mentions, LOTS of redundancy... how many "search" icons and "close" icons do we really need anyway?

ShareBird wrote:Hmmm.... What about maybe a test platform by Mozilla, where we could submitt a XUL file and have a screenshot how it looks? Something like:
http://browsershots.org/

Just an idea...

Could be helpful, but i doubt it would change something.

For example Bug 418774 - -moz-image-region does not appear to work in Mac OSX menus.
Nearly every theme has this bug and and it would need only some minutes for a themer to include a fix.
And we will see likely never a fix from Mozilla itself (probably impossible).
But not even most of the hardcore themer, who know the bug for years and who know how to fix it, spend the time to include a fix. As mentioned before: Most of the arguments here are only pseudo.

Cheers

patrickjdempsey wrote:I check my statistics at AMO specifically to see if Mac and Linux users are using my themes, and especially if they are actively using them. I've got hundreds of Mac and Linux users and aside from early versions that were not "fixed" to be compatible at all, and a few problems with Extensions (something I REALLY can't test for!) I've had virtually no complaints from my Mac and Linux users.

I had no complains from Linux users so far but I saw a couple of problems some time ago and fixed them. In the other hand I had a lot of bug reports from Mac users. After all I have more than 3000 daily users for that platform and another 3500 for Linux. I even have 1 loyal user on IRIX64. Poor him as I will never be able to support him if Firefox isn't TRULY multiplatform (meaning the theme is applied the same way in Windows than in IRIX).

DonGato wrote:As I'm doing like you, using the "-moz-appearance: none" all around my theme and providing special styling for everything I don't have many problems reported. I use also custom scrollbars and fixed the issue I had with the preferences panel recently..

Thanks, Don. This is what I figured, I also figured that that was misdirection floating around on this thread.

ShareBird wrote:Hmmm.... What about maybe a test platform by Mozilla, where we could submit a XUL file and have a screenshot of how it looks? Something like:
http://browsershots.org/

Just an idea...

I think it's a very good idea. Really, for non-native themers the problem is really one of seeing the results of what you are coding, be they for Vista (in my case), Mac or any other OSs or OS versions that you don't run.

My 3 betatesters, who unfortunately all run the same OS and version as I do, all provide screenshots of any problem areas long before release and the stuff is fixed. Yes, users on different stuff may later provide screenshots as well, but you can not expect them to provide the flurry of screenshots that is necessary to code/see result/code/see result/adjust positions/see result, etc which is how stuff is fixed on an OS you cannot see. So - having an 'unmanned' test platform where you could upload, say, the Options window, and see the result on multiple platforms and versions of, would be ideal.

However, going back to the point of this thread, that is no real answer for the inexperienced or occasional themer who is trying to work with a native default theme and, somehow, make it cross version and cross platform. Patrick is absolutely right to keep pulling this thread back to that scenario, simply because new themers bring new ideas and are the lifeblood of moving themes forward and it should be made as easy as possible for them to produce themes, not as hard as possible.

No good looking to experienced themers for this. However many new and exciting and innovative ideas they may have, and some of us have, making themes is a poison chalice with a cut off point, simply because there is a limit to how many themes one guy can maintain.

Frank Lion wrote:However, going back to the point of this thread, that is no real answer for the inexperienced or occasional themer who is trying to work with a native default theme and, somehow, make it cross version and cross platform. Patrick is absolutely right to keep pulling this thread back to that scenario, ..

There is one realistic answer for these inexperienced themer:
The default themes have now a lot of platform specific code and they will have have in the future even more and this because of many many good reasons.
Is is now a lot of work to make these themes cross platform and it will be in the future even more work. They should not dreaming and hope that this will be changed.

And maybe is Patrick is absolutely right to keep pulling this thread back to that scenario. We should also ask for food for everyone, everyday should be a sunny day and peace on earth would be as well nice .. and all this is similar realistic