[theme-reviewers] Ticket recheck by Admin

Edward Caissie edward.caissie at gmail.com
Tue Mar 13 03:22:51 UTC 2012

I would tend to agree that hooks may not require custom prefixing in the
same fashion as functions, classes, global variables, etc.


On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Michael Fields <
michaelfields at automattic.com> wrote:

>  > We currently require derivatives of Twenty Ten/Twenty Twelve to use
> their own namespace for function names, hooks, etc. I see no reason to
> treat Underscores derivatives any differently.
> As far as I can tell from reading http://codex.wordpress.org/Theme_Reviewthe use of prefixes on hooks names is not a requirement. There are two
> places where prefixes are discussed:
> 1. Theme Namespacing: " Themes are *required* to use a unique slug as a
> prefix for all custom function names, classes, public/global variables,
> database entries (Theme options, post custom metadata, etc.) "
> 2. Security and Privacy: " Themes are *required* to prefix all options,
> custom functions, custom variables, and custom constants with theme-slug
> (or appropriate variant)."
> Required prefixes for hooks are not listed in either sentence.
> Is there another place where this is addressed?
> I do not believe that themes should be required to prefix all hook names
> used in the theme. There are valid use-cases for not prefixing them like
> plugin integration:
> https://github.com/mfields/nighthawk/blob/master/category.php#L23
> If this was to be added to the requirements, would it be possible to add a
> case-by-case clause to it somehow?
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120312/c0a869d1/attachment.htm>

More information about the theme-reviewers mailing list