Re: Re: Explicit forum width


Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister
	PerlMonks

Re: Re: Explicit forum width

by flyingmoose (Priest)

on Apr 17, 2004 at 17:13 UTC ( [id://345989]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re: Explicit forum width
in thread Explicit forum width

I am always one to ask the meta-question "can this be automated"? So, why consider when we can s/$pretag/you-can't-do-that/g ? It seems to go with the philosophy of not trusting user input on internet forums.

I haven't checked, but I am assuming we are doing things to remove javascript...

<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript"> document.write("Hello World!"); </SCRIPT>

So yes, why do we allow pre?

Comment on Re: Re: Explicit forum width

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re: Re: Explicit forum width
by hossman (Prior) on Apr 17, 2004 at 18:08 UTC

because there are legitimate uses of pre tags

some monks us them to create small ascii art sigs.

Other monks use them when raw data, or the output of a script -- which they don't want to put in code blocks because it's not code, it shouldnt' be included in the code download

Generating a warning if someone submits text with a pre tag containing lines longer then N characters is one thing, but it would be a travesty to flat out reject the tag just because some people don't know how to use it in a non-obtrusive way.

PS: regecting pre tags doesn't really do anthing about long sequences of   tags...