Topics

locked Bug in message formatting - strikethrough doesn't "stick".


 

Oops:

The strikethrough font attribute doesn't appear to save when editing a message. Bold and color do.

Oh, it doesn't post when creating a new message either.

-- Shal


 

I wrote:

The strikethrough font attribute doesn't appear to save when editing a message. Bold and color do.

Oh, it doesn't post when creating a new message either.

I take that back. The strikethrough came through in the email, so it must be just a display problem in the archive.

Nope, not as simple as that either. Strikethrough shows in the archive for my message in this (beta) group, which was posted by email. But not in the archive of a message in my test group posted via the group. But it did come through in the email of that same message.

-- Shal


 

Would strike-through come through anyway in plain text, which is how I and many
others always read email? If it's showing something significant about the edit,
another way of doing it might be more appropriate.

Jim Fisher

On 16 Nov 2014 at 1:46, Shal Farley wrote:

I wrote:

The strikethrough font attribute doesn't appear to save when editing a message.
Bold and color do.

Oh, it doesn't post when creating a new message either.
I take that back. The strikethrough came through in the email, so it must be
just a display problem in the archive.

Nope, not as simple as that either. Strikethrough shows in the archive for my
message in this (beta) group, which was posted by email. But not in the archive
of a message in my test group posted via the group. But it did come through in
the email of that same message.

-- Shal


--
http://www.jimella.me.uk - my personal web site covering many subjects
http://jimellame.tumblr.com - My thoughts on freedom
http://jimella.wordpress.com - political snippets, especially economic policy
http://jimella.livejournal.com - misc. snippets, some political, some not
Forget Google! I search with https://duckduckgo.com which doesn't spy on you


 

Jim,

Would strike-through come through anyway in plain text, which is how I
and many others always read email?
Not if you have your email client or service set to show you the text/plain part of a multipart message. My own preference for plain text notwithstanding, I think you "and many others" are a vanishingly small minority, getting smaller all the time.

If it's showing something significant about the edit, another way of
doing it might be more appropriate.
Arguably true of Bold or any other text formatting as well. But that wasn't the point - this was a bug report not a comment on preferred practice.

-- Shal


 

Shal,

The issue was with what CSS we allow when displaying messages in the archive. We have to 'cook' any HTML messages before displaying them, to ensure that no malicious stuff is presented (javascript pointing to malware, for example). We're very conservative with what CSS is displayed. The HTML widget on the site generates strikethrough using the text-decoration CSS tag, which we were not permitting. I've whitelisted it, and now strikethrough should display.

There are multiple ways to generate strikethrough (it's unclear to me which is best). Your email client probably generated strikethrough using an HTML tag, which we support.

Thanks,
Mark

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Shal Farley <shal@...> wrote:
I wrote:

The strikethrough font attribute doesn't appear to save when editing a message. Bold and color do.

Oh, it doesn't post when creating a new message either.

I take that back. The strikethrough came through in the email, so it must be just a display problem in the archive.

Nope, not as simple as that either. Strikethrough shows in the archive for my message in this (beta) group, which was posted by email. But not in the archive of a message in my test group posted via the group. But it did come through in the email of that same message.

-- Shal



 

Mark,

The issue was with what CSS we allow when displaying messages in the archive.
...
There are multiple ways to generate strikethrough (it's unclear to me
which is best).
Ah, no wonder it didn't make sense to me (not much CSS experience).

We have to 'cook' any HTML messages before displaying them, to ensure
that no malicious stuff is presented (javascript pointing to malware,
for example). We're very conservative with what CSS is displayed.
Thank goodness.

Yahoo used to publish in a help page the whitelist of HTML tags that it would allow in Group descriptions and messages. It applied that whitelist even to message bodies passed through as individual messages. They took down that help page a few years ago and replaced it with "try it and see, you're on your own if it doesn't work".

-- Shal


 

I wrote:

Yahoo used to publish in a help page the whitelist of HTML tags that it
would allow in Group descriptions and messages. It applied that
whitelist even to message bodies passed through as individual messages.
They took down that help page a few years ago and replaced it with "try
it and see, you're on your own if it doesn't work".
I stand corrected, the explicit list is back.

"Using HTML or CSS in Yahoo Groups messages"
https://help.yahoo.com/kb/groups/SLN2506.html

The last time I looked for it I only found this one:

"Customer Care does not provide support for using HTML or other scripts in Yahoo Groups"
https://help.yahoo.com/kb/groups/SLN4501.html

-- Shal