[theme-reviewers] Custom implementation of required hooks

[Edward Caissie]

Actually, now that I have read the inline docs, the function is performing
exactly as expected and described by Konstantin.
Although there is a filter in there that may be able to be worked with ...


Cais.


On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Edward Caissie
<edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:

> If the function does behave as Konstantin is stating (still untested) I
> agree with Chip, a patch is definitely in order ... or the documentation
> needs to be much more clear.
>
>
> Cais.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>
>> I understand your question now. :)
>>
>> I agree that the markup output by wp_link_pages() is... lacking. However,
>> I would much rather see a core patch to improve the default markup than
>> have Themes roll their own custom markup.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Chip
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Konstantin Obenland <obenland at gmx.de>wrote:
>>
>>> I have a question concerning wp_link_pages().
>>> In the codex, the function is listed under "Required Hooks and
>>> Navigation" (
>>> http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Review#Required_Hooks_and_Navigation).
>>> Would it be okay for a theme to provide the same functionality, but with
>>> a custom implementation?
>>> In this case it's echoing it as an unordered list, which can't be
>>> achieved through passing arguments to wp_link_pages().
>>>
>>> Looking forward to your insights,
>>> Konstantin
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20120311/d7347e47/attachment.htm>