I invited public themes for the next generation for checking the spec of XOOPS Cube 1.0, before. But, I began to think that it's must to develop BASE for the purpose. Let's say a name of this BASE is "TEST BASE".
XOOPS Cube Legacy has been developed to emulate XOOPS2 JP. On the other hand, I think that TEST BASE should imitate RapidWeaver, because RapidWeaver Model can assimilate advantages of Nuke Style. Plus, we can shorten a development period by developing personal CMS. If a development period is short, it will be possible to explain a model of RapidWeaver to Linux/Windows users who don't have Mac OS X through TEST BASE. The decided spec will make theme development easy. Even if we will release TEST BASE as a concept model, it doesn't force anything to developers. That's an advantage of XOOPS Cube.
RapidWeaver depends on iPhoto, iMovie and iTunes for media management. This design is good for checking the spec of XOOPS Cube 1.0 through TEST BASE. Someone pointed to weak points of XOOPS2 JP, but this design (dividing CMS core and Media Management) will be good idea for these weak points.
I should write some spec documentation. When we developed XCL, the spec documentation was XOOPS2 JP. And, I made up for unenough documents with PDF document and Doxygen document. In this time, even if we imitate RapidWeaver, there are big difference between a native application and a web application. So we will need to take a different way from XCL, for keeping the same goal.