Send patches - preferably formatted by git format-patch - to patches at archlinux32 dot org.
summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/WYSIWYG
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAndreas Baumann <mail@andreasbaumann.cc>2020-02-01 09:05:48 +0100
committerAndreas Baumann <mail@andreasbaumann.cc>2020-02-01 09:05:48 +0100
commit6854cb3f4d8219cf1829e32122eb2502a916eae9 (patch)
tree350feb504587d932e02837a1442b059759927646 /vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/WYSIWYG
initial checkin
Diffstat (limited to 'vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/WYSIWYG')
-rw-r--r--vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/WYSIWYG20
1 files changed, 20 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/WYSIWYG b/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/WYSIWYG
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c518aac
--- /dev/null
+++ b/vendor/ezyang/htmlpurifier/WYSIWYG
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+
+WYSIWYG - What You See Is What You Get
+ HTML Purifier: A Pretty Good Fit for TinyMCE and FCKeditor
+
+Javascript-based WYSIWYG editors, simply stated, are quite amazing. But I've
+always been wary about using them due to security issues: they handle the
+client-side magic, but once you've been served a piping hot load of unfiltered
+HTML, what should be done then? In some situations, you can serve it uncleaned,
+since you only offer these facilities to trusted(?) authors.
+
+Unfortunantely, for blog comments and anonymous input, BBCode, Textile and
+other markup languages still reign supreme. Put simply: filtering HTML is
+hard work, and these WYSIWYG authors don't offer anything to alleviate that
+trouble. Therein lies the solution:
+
+HTML Purifier is perfect for filtering pure-HTML input from WYSIWYG editors.
+
+Enough said.
+
+ vim: et sw=4 sts=4