[theme-reviewers] Standard Theme Hooks

[Doug Stewart]

Ahh. Well, we can discuss it further over on the Github page if you'd like,
but in brief, I named them as such so that you can easily determine hook
location semantically by scanning left-to-right. [prefix]_[semantic theme
portion]_[position]. It's actually in the "Conventions" portion of the
README. *grin*


On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Daniel Tara <contact at onedesigns.com> wrote:

> That wasn't my question. I agree with what you said. What I asked is why
> is the hook called header_after and not after_header how semantics dictate
> and how it's always been done.
>
> Daniel
>
> On Nov 2, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Michael Fields wrote:
>
> >
> >> I don't understand why THA must alter a convention that was always in
> place in theme hooks.
> >
> > Have non-prefixed hooks allows for easier communication between plugins
> and theme. A plugin developer can hook into something like "header_after"
> and add it's markup there. In cases where the hook is prefixed with the
> theme slug, it is impossible for the plugin developer to know what the
> prefix is.
> >
> >> Also, is this is to be made standard will the tha_ prefix be used? I'd
> rather go with something more familiar like wp_.
> >
> > Hopefully, no. The idea of the standard would be to have all themes
> using the same exact hooks so that plugins could integrate with
> all-of-the-themes.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>



-- 
-Doug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20121102/88c61387/attachment.htm>