phpBB goes all CSS / tablefree

[Wayne Luke]

Obviously I wasn't fully aware of the definition of "Open Source", but it looks that source code exposure is a requirement, according to the official definition (Check the original source from OpenSource.org).

Yes, but vBulletin's license doesn't allow for items 1 and 3 or the freely obtainable part of item 2 in that list. Those are just as key to being "open source" as being able to view the source code.

[tjr]

Obviously I wasn't fully aware of the definition of "Open Source", but it looks that source code exposure is a requirement, according to the official definition (Check the original source from OpenSource.org).

Source code must be available to be considered "Open Source." One of the fundamental ideas behind Open Source Software is that anybody can modify it to their own liking.

I believe what Wayne was trying to clarify, is that the ability to view the source does not make it "Open Source."

[tjr]

There is absolutely no doubt that semantic XHTML styled with CSS is the way forward and that the use of tables for layout purposes is yesterday's technique.

The vBulletin development team has done several experiments with this method of producing pages and we will be employing it for vBulletin 4.

However, these experiments also identified several points which mean that, as Wayne rightly pointed out earlier in this thread, there is no way that we can or will switch to an entirely CSS-driven template system for the vBulletin 3.x system.

Firstly, we aim to maintain backward compatability for the most part between versions x.y and x.y+1 and the change to an entirely CSS-based system would completely destroy this. We'd be looking at rewriting every single template from the ground up to achieve a semantic XHTML + CSS base.

Secondly, CSS lends itself to a very different way of laying out pages. Many of the interface elements in vBulletin 3.x simply cannot be reproduced using CSS alone without major hacking, and we'd like to avoid that. For this reason, we decided to stick with the current system for the time being and then start again with a clean slate for vBulletin 4.0, which will most likely look very different from the current 3.x style.

Thirdly, the vBulletin 3.x style is built around a fairly small group of CSS classes, each of which do little more than define background and foreground colors, text styling and in some cases some padding and border definitions. A style where the layout is controlled exclusively by CSS will require vastly more CSS classes and selectors. Take a look at the gargantuan CSS files used in the new phpBB system and it's obvious that the current vBulletin style editor would struggle to present all of this data in an elegant and user-friendly manner. Even now, the CSS editor page is overly long and unwieldy. When we go with a full CSS system we'll be looking to dramatically change the CSS editor to allow it to better deal with the inevitably larger number of items it will need to control.

So in conclusion the message is this: Semantic XHTML + CSS is good and you'll see it in use in vBulletin 4 but for the time being we have to stick with the current system.

I completely understand your reasoning, but it also leaves me with some questions. I'm curious about the possibility of creating a new template engine in addition to the current one. If not for vB3.x, would it be impractical to keep a "legacy" engine in addition to the re-designed one for vB4.x? I'm sure that would make a lot of customers happy. Also, in the move to modernized vB with more semantically correct markup and styling, what part might the community play in that? I'm sure there are plenty willing to contribute work or ideas towards a new default style, but what influence might we have on the new template system itself?

I'm admittedly new to the world of vBulletin administration, so I might not have the style manager completely sussed out. That said, there are some things I like about it, and others were I feel it could be improved. I enjoy that I can edit templates in the browser, change things like the paths to images and even make minor "point and click" edits to CSS--What I don't like, is that this appears to be difficult to do externally in a text editor should I choose to do so. In that, I'd prefer to see each template in its own file (akin to phpBB3's system), with the option of creating a separate CSS file per template (in addition to a master style sheet). If speed were an issue in the separation of said files, they could be aggregated into a single file when the style is installed.

And I really don't mean to sound like a critic or someone who knows what's "best"; vBulletin is my favorite among the forum software I've used. I just figure that now would be the time to offer input. Personally, I'd like the ability to more easily create vB styles (templates and CSS) independent of the ACP. I'm not advocating the removal of ACP controls, just more ease for those of us who'd rather circumvent them. . . Additionally, while all the talk of semantically correct markup is good for the future of vB's default style, when I create my own I'd like as much freedom as possible. If that means displaying tabular data with CSS, or nesting table upon table, I feel I should be able to do so no matter how beautiful or ridiculous.

[simsim]

A point of clarification.. Open Source does not mean you can see the source code. It is a dedication to distributing software under a specific model that means the software has no associated cost.

vBulletin has never been Open Source.

Obviously I wasn't fully aware of the definition of "Open Source", but it looks that source code exposure is a requirement, according to the official definition (Check the original source from OpenSource.org).

[Comtech]

Well phpbb3 only has taken what? 6 years now?

True but the developers are not the top notched ones we have here at vBulletin.com (The developers are not paid for the work they do on PHPBB...which could explain why it has taken so long to develop 3.0. Each PHPBB developer may have other jobs to perform and thus leading to PHPBB Development falling behind. Where as vBulletin.com's developers are all employees of Jelsoft and thus are paid) - and I would hope you guys and gals have something similar planned for a new release (vBulletin 4.0?)

While I do love the new skin and feel it is better than the default skins from any PHPBB Competitors or their premium counterparts...I am 100% loyal to vBulletin (there is no better forum software available in terms of features.) and I am hoping we won't be left with the Boxy styled default skin for much longer.

[Wayne Luke]

They can the mixture of "Visible Source" & licensing to keep phpBB an open source project, just like Jelsoft did with vBulletin.

A point of clarification.. Open Source does not mean you can see the source code. It is a dedication to distributing software under a specific model that means the software has no associated cost.

vBulletin has never been Open Source.

[simsim]

Great design indeed! Good for them. However, I still can't understand why they don't sell an extraordinary popular software such as phpBB? If they want to keep something free for the world, they can keep a basic free version & then develop a fully-supported commercial one. Free in "Free Software" does not mean price; it means freedom. They can use a mixture of "Visible Source" policy & licensing system to keep phpBB an open source project, just like what Jelsoft did with vBulletin.

[Zachery]

The new look for PHPBB is simply awe inspiring (Gorgeous) & I am actually shocked that they went web 2.0'ish before vBulletin did. I am hoping Jelsoft is taking a serious look at PHPBB’s new layout and come out with something as good, if not better than it.


The Boxy age is over; the new vBulletin default style should have round edges to almost every inch of the style. Please take the great intuitive of upgrading the default skin for vBulletin. All of your major competitors have already updated their default skins from IPB (still awful looking) to PHPBB.

Well phpbb3 only has taken what? 6 years now?

[Comtech]

The new look for PHPBB is simply awe inspiring (Gorgeous) & I am actually shocked that they went web 2.0'ish before vBulletin did. I am hoping Jelsoft is taking a serious look at PHPBB’s new layout and come out with something as good, if not better than it.


The Boxy age is over; the new vBulletin default style should have round edges to almost every inch of the style. Please take the great intuitive of upgrading the default skin for vBulletin. All of your major competitors have already updated their default skins from IPB (still awful looking) to PHPBB.

[---MAD---]

Glad to see Kier giving us some insight into vBulletin 4 .

[Neal-UK]

Looks nice, love the way posts show also.

[filburt1]

The entire point, however, is that it's irrelevant from a development standpoint how the product looks. If the code is semantic and therefore separates presentation from structure, it's trivial to change the application's global appearance. vBulletin already meets halfway by allowing you to edit templates, but by ditching tables and so on (yes, yes, I know the next version will), then you can truly customize the entire site without needing to do things like rewrite templates.

[Grover]

I think phpBB's style is great, and is definitely a big leap forward for bulletin board design. The rest of their site looks great as well, especially compared to Jelsoft's.

Although I have always liked the style of the vBulletin 3 series, I do agree with you that the Jelsoft website doesn't really look that well. In fact, I always found that in the vB 2 days (the purple fase ) the Jelsoft website had a much better look and feel then it does nowadays.

[MRGTB]

Intersting to see it has gone tableless. Not really sure what to think of the new forum look though. I don't like the new post icons.

Also noticed is fails to validate as well

[DirectPixel]

I agree with that. You may never find <div> before <input ... > in normal pages...

In addition, This page is not Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!

It doesn't validate because two <img /> tags are not closed properly. Not a big deal, and very easy to fix. Just a tiny bug.