Wedge

if anyone needs my help on any new theme variations themes, I'd also be glad to give it a go!

or any off line testing, would also be glad to help!

regards,
maxx

What do you mean, don't like mine? :niark:

Never knew about the theming system but all I know is that wireless is by far the best theme here at Wedge. Originally create as a default theme for mobile phones but it is running smoothly on PC and the speed is amazing. Another thing that works commenting on is the Web 2.0 look.

Wedge is super-fast, mostly because its HTML is very tidy and all JavaScript is loaded at the end of the page (except if it's already cached and running fast, then it's loaded at the beginning, because I'm very much a mad optimizer.)
That's one of its points... I've always found SMF to be slower than some competitors like Fluxbb, which to be fair doesn't have the same amount of features or JavaScript. I wanted it to be on par... And still retain the same speed.

Also, most images are loaded through CSS embedding, so it's all a single server hit, meaning you don't get that delay in loading the later icons.

Web 2.0, far from it... I have a WIP skin around, but it's not ready for primetime. It's supposed to be more 2.0ish than the other skins.

What does Web 2.0 look like anyway?

I always thought web 2.0 was just a catch phrase the same way that could computing is at the moment, in a few years it will just go back to being plain old computing....!?

Am not a teacher but simple example is this

Open default Phpbb theme
Open Wireless the of Wedge
Log in to both of them
Try to use them, each for about five minutes

Give the result.
.......................................................................................

Drive two heavy trucks
One power steering, the other air steering
Drive both in a bended and busy road for about 1 mile
Give result.

This isn't an answer though, your basically saying that PHPbb's and Wedge's theme are 'Web 2.0' when they are the interpretation by the said group (that's even if either theme was built for 'Web 2.0') inline with industry practises and expected functionality/layout/ease of use.

Opposite

I actually bring two of them to light so somebody can compare and see the difference, to my understanding, web 2.0 looks is the web with modern look with neatly written html, working rss, color match - no color riot etc, etc. I was testing the rss in phpbb and found out after wasting a lot of time that phpbb  can only give rss to each topic and not to thread, this means that every post made have its on rss link and no rss link for topics/threads only.
Another good feature of web 2.0 is the ajax based functionality.

web 2.0 is nothing more than a catchphrase....

there is no "official web 2.0 specification"

So, you can call ANYTHING web 2.0 (and my company has done just that...   adding rounded corners and calling it the new, web 2.0 site)

BTW: Nao and Arantor... I don't think I've said it... but I like this theme.
For a while, though, it was having some really odd effects on the iPad and on my netbook (really small screen) with the miniprofile to the left actually appearing as a message-topper instead of a left col)

@Kindred
Thanks #neverknew
And yes, wireless is the best, using it as my default theme on both desktop and mobile browser.

- web 2.0 is just a marketing word, yes. However, its original definition was that web 1.0 gave power to authors, while web 2.0 added power to the community, i.e. the development of comments in websites and blogs. It is largely accepted that web 2.0 was simply 'inspired' by what Amazon has been doing for a very, very long time (user reviews). From a designer's point of view, the 'web 2.0' definition relates to the trend that took off a few years ago, where websites started using bright, contrasted primitive colors on a white background. Typography is also a large parge of it.

- Wireless is pretty much the same as Weaving, with the exception of a few differences on the homepage, and topic pages showing the userbox on top of messages, rather than to their left... I don't see the reason for comparing the two..? They're the same really, but Wireless is optimized for narrow widths, that's all there is to say..?