So here is what I’m wondering…
You all know about Option-tree and similar frameworks that theme authors are using for their theme option pages. You also all know that since 3.4 WordPress introduced their Customization API. Obviously they will want theme authors to use it instead of the frameworks metnioned. And obviously this will be the good way, since it’s native.
However, their is one issue… WP Customizer doesn’t provide enough space. Imagine you have huge options panel such as this one for example:
I can think of a way to import all of them into the Customizer… that also goes for social links, layout options, background pattern options and so on…
One way I can think of is creating separate admin pages for these… but if you get that approach chances are that you will end up with few different pages for your options.. and that will surely confuse guys using your theme.
So what we should do?
Please, let me know your thoughts.
The only thing in the screenshot above that needs space is the header images, the rest could easily be placed into the Customisation API. Bear in mind you can enqueue CSS, JS, and custom controls on the theme customiser, so with a little bit of creativity you can easily create a simple system perfect for the above page with no problem.
Loads of authors here will argue against the theme customiser, but I’ve been using it for all my themes on here and never run into any issue.
The great thing is, it works perfectly, no matter what, with each WP Update, unlike external options panels (potential CSS breaks on each WP Update if there are any shared styles)
Thanks Tom, I’ll check your portfolio
I’m a huge supporter of the Customization API as well. Been using it for the last 5 or so themes and have plans to update older themes with it as well. Like TommusRhodus mentioned, things will continue to work right with minor and major WP updates – whereas I used to have to update my options framework quite a bit on every major WP version. Saves a lot of time and energy on the developers side, and a lot of “unnecessary relearning” on the users side.