Chip Bennett

This definitely moves away from _template location-based action hooks_, into _contextual content filters_. If we can standardize on these as well, it can only help the overall goals of the...

> I guess I see this from a plugin author's point of view (as someone who happens to write a very popular breadcrumb plugin), hence the specific example. Absolutely! In...

+1 from me as well. I just added 5 new hooks to Oenology that I was unaware had been added to THA. I may be slow at times, but I...

I think `wp_head()` should supersede both `tha_head_top` and `tha_head_bottom`. If anyone needs to hook into the document head, they can (and _should_) do so via `wp_head` (or any of the...

> What about if you need to inject something directly after the ``? What would the use cases be? When does something _absolutely have_ to be injected _immediately_ after the...

I think it is important to remember that `wp_footer()` is _not intended_ to inject _HTML content_ into the template, but rather is intended primarily for linking _footer scripts_. That is...

The advantage of using template-tag reference functions to the `do_action()` calls is that it makes the hook location much more easily extensible, both for existing Theme custom hooks, and for...

@mindctrl sure, here's the example I used in Issue #11: In the template, I call `oenology_hook_content_after()`, which is defined as follows: ``` function oenology_hook_content_after() { do_action( 'oenology_hook_content_after' ); } ```...

p.s. I'll gladly do a pull request; I just wanted to get the concept blessed before doing so.

The way I implemented this in Oenology, since I already had template-tag functions in the template, that fired the custom Theme template hooks (such as `oenology_hook_content_after()`), was simply to add...