content
content copied to clipboard
Added examples for the Sanitizer parameters API
This is related to the https://github.com/mdn/content/pull/18790#event-7061644512 I added examples for the Sanitizer parameters API. I appreciate feedbacks.
Summary
Motivation
Supporting details
Related issues
Metadata
- [x] Adds a new document
- [ ] Rewrites (or significantly expands) a document
- [x] Fixes a typo, bug, or other error
Preview URLs
Flaws
None! 🎉
External URLs
URL: /en-US/docs/Web/API/Sanitizer/Sanitizer
Title: Sanitizer()
on GitHub
No new external URLs
(this comment was updated 2022-07-27 07:15:24.629867)
@najmiehsa, Thank you for submitting these examples. Unfortunately, when this lands in Chrome beta next week, only Element.setHTML() will be shipping. One of the spec authors, who is also Chrome's lead on the project tells me that the authors generally want to change the design. In other words, in Chrome's release, you'll be able to pass new Sanitizer() as the second parameter to setHTML(), but you will not be able to call sanitize() and sanitizeFor().
Given that the Firefox implementation of these methods is still behind a flag, I do not think we should merge this pull request.
cc: @Rumyra
Yes, we need one implementation (not behind a flag) before merging a feature into MDN. We document browsers and not specs.
I'm going to close this (after Joe replies) because the time taken for this to be "supported" is still open ended (and as Joe says, might not be quite this implementation). Thanks @najmiehsa for doing this - sorry to ask you for it with this result.
@jpmedley Are you taking care of the browser compat updates required? If not, I would need more information to update this.
What I'm seeing now:
- `Element.setHTML() not marked as supported in preview.
sanitize()andsanitizeFor()are rendering as "preview browser support". The BCD shows them as supported in 105. Opera etc are not mirrored (I would expect them to be).
Anyway, it is not clear to me from the current BCD whether they would be callable in the preview version. My assumption as it is now is that they would be.
@teoli2003 PS I merged the original docs for this as part of an FF release project. Did not appreciate at that time that a non-pref implementation was required.