Just the HTML sanitizer piece seems like it could be a manageable chunk, perhaps, seeing as the code is pure javascript?
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Gonzalo Aune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, its not like PHP will NEVER support caja, it takes some time, but PHP > perfectly can have it, but as i say before, it will be a HUGE effort to do a > port to PHP > > G.- > > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Brian Eaton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Ugh. >> >> We need a way for PHP to depend on Caja, or we need to get >> gadgets.util.sanitizeHtml pulled out of the opensocial spec, or we >> need to accept that PHP Shindig will never implement that function. >> >> For now we can probably make the implementation of >> gadgets.util.sanitizeHtml dependent on the presence of the Caja HTML >> sanitization code. >> >> On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I build in a 'ignore anything that starts with res://' into the feature >> > parsing a while ago already (back then it was the caja changes that made >> php >> > shindig upset), so the changes doesn't cause the world to burn directly. >> > >> > However the file won't be included by php shindig either, so please that >> > keep in mind before building something that depends on it, otherwise you >> > could break quite a few social sites :) >> > >> > On Aug 15, 2008, at 8:22 PM, Josh Landin wrote: >> > >> >> I agree. >> >> >> >> On 8/15/08, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Requiring PHP users to build, download, and manage a jar (not to >> mention >> >>> adding the code to deal with it to the PHP build) to get one javascript >> >>> file >> >>> is completely unreasonable. >> > >> > >> >
