<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body dir="ltr" bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><font face="Arial">It's
true, but hook_menu is, after all, dealing with paths and links.</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><font face="Arial">Paths
and links are what allows us to navigate inside a site, and they are
commonly combined in a menu.</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><font face="Arial">If
we checked it statistically, I'm sure we would have found that most of
the items in the menu hook are not actually visible as menu items, but
when thinking of a menu i a larger context, we find it's not at all a
bad name.</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><font face="Arial">A
menu is a representation of a site's structure, whether it's a logical
structure, or a more physic one. So in this way - even if an item is
not visible, it's still part of the structure, and as a result - has
its place in the menu.</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><font face="Arial"><br>
</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0cm; margin-top: 0pt;"><font face="Arial">Zohar</font><br>
</p>
<br>
Karoly Negyesi wrote:
<blockquote cite="midop.tkf0pnzgq2e0ri@drupal.tvnetwork.hu" type="cite">Today
it was raised in #drupal that hook_menu has so little to do with menus
nowadays that
<br>
<br>
hook_control
<br>
<br>
is likely to be a better name for the system. Thoughts are welcome. MVC
flames are not.
<br>
<br>
Regards
<br>
<br>
NK
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>