Is this the prefered method to implement RedCloth in your views. I''m trying to display user input that will sometimes have code references in it. This strips out all tags. I would like for the tags to be displayed but not read as html. Thanks in advance! <%= RedCloth.new(strip_tags(comment.comment),[:filter_html]).to_html %> charlie bowman recentrambles.com -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Usually it''s better to convert the text when it gets submitted and
store
a clean version in a separate field. That way there''s no overhead of
doing a conversion every time the record is viewed.
Checkout how Typo does it. For instance, the table article has a field
"body" that is what the user entered, and another field
"body_html" that
is the red or blue cloth translated text. They have a file called
html_engine.rb in the Lib folder. I just stole that file whole sale for
my app and then in your model just do:
before_save :transform_body
def transform_body
self.body_html = HtmlEngine.transform(body, ''textile'',
[:filter_html])
end
And in your views do <%= @article.body_html %> instead of @article.body
Easy peasy.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
On 27 Feb 2006, at 05:37, Chris Johanesen wrote:> Usually it''s better to convert the text when it gets submitted and > store > a clean version in a separate field. That way there''s no overhead of > doing a conversion every time the record is viewed.That''s a really obvious way of doing it that i''d never considered - d''oh! Has anyone done any benchmarking to roughly determine how much overhead is involved in throwing a chunk of text at RedCloth? If not, i''ll have to experiment with that when I get home. ...j
Jamie Wilson wrote:> On 27 Feb 2006, at 05:37, Chris Johanesen wrote: > >> Usually it''s better to convert the text when it gets submitted and store >> a clean version in a separate field. That way there''s no overhead of >> doing a conversion every time the record is viewed. > > That''s a really obvious way of doing it that i''d never considered - d''oh! > > Has anyone done any benchmarking to roughly determine how much > overhead is involved in throwing a chunk of text at RedCloth?Hang on a sec... That sounds like premature optimization to me. If you are properly caching pages or even fragments then pre-converting markup on submission is largely redundant. I''d say leave off the optimization until you do some performance profiling to see what actually needs to be optimized. I know Typo does pre-conversion which may work well for that setup, but I''ve got a simpler site that runs about 99.9% out of cache, so conversion overhead is almost entirely irrelevant. By the way, check out the "textilize" helper in the TextHelper library. That''s how I convert using RedCloth in the view. If you need different options for RedCloth, I suggest making your own flavor of helper and use that. --josh blog.hasmanythrough.com -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Josh Susser wrote:> Jamie Wilson wrote: > >> On 27 Feb 2006, at 05:37, Chris Johanesen wrote: >> >> >>> Usually it''s better to convert the text when it gets submitted and store >>> a clean version in a separate field. That way there''s no overhead of >>> doing a conversion every time the record is viewed. >>> >> That''s a really obvious way of doing it that i''d never considered - d''oh! >> >> Has anyone done any benchmarking to roughly determine how much >> overhead is involved in throwing a chunk of text at RedCloth? >> > > Hang on a sec... That sounds like premature optimization to me. If you > are properly caching pages or even fragments then pre-converting markup > on submission is largely redundant. I''d say leave off the optimization > until you do some performance profiling to see what actually needs to be > optimized. I know Typo does pre-conversion which may work well for that > setup, but I''ve got a simpler site that runs about 99.9% out of cache, > so conversion overhead is almost entirely irrelevant. > >If we are simply talking about sanitizing input, I would argue that pre-sanitizing on input gives you a safer environment. You won''t have to worry about changes in the display exposing latent XSS hacks stored in the database. However, if we are talking about when to mark up, I do follow the meme ingrained by my sound recording experience: do no harm to your input. So yes, like a good compressor or EQ, you only apply it on the way out. You can always change it then, but once you record it you can''t change it back. Sure text is a bit more malleable, if there isn''t a good reason (like safety) then leave it alone. BTW, recording does provide pre-processing on the bass guitar to protect equipment--particularly if the player uses funk influenced bass lines. But thats about it.
On Fri, 03 Mar 2006 16:42:24 -0500, Berin Loritsch wrote:> However, if we are talking about when to mark up, I do follow the meme > ingrained by my sound recording experience: do no harm to your input.Is there a British method of textilizing, where you do all your markup and localization before you commit the record to disk? Is RedCloth warmer and punchier than BlueCloth? Jay
> However, if we are talking about when to mark up, I do follow the meme > ingrained by my sound recording experience: do no harm to your input.Yes, I believe that is why typo keeps a copy of the original input in say "body" and the converted text in "body_html". Of course everything depends on implementation. I''ve been sort of using Typo as my model as I learn rails, it''s nice to know there are other ways to do things :) It makes sense that if you''re caching almost everything then maybe do the conversion on the way out. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Chris Johanesen wrote:>> However, if we are talking about when to mark up, I do follow the meme >> ingrained by my sound recording experience: do no harm to your input. > > Yes, I believe that is why typo keeps a copy of the original input in > say "body" and the converted text in "body_html".There''s also a "filters_column" plugin which makes storing a copy of the converted text pretty simple if you go that route. http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/Filters+Column+Plugin -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> There''s also a "filters_column" plugin which makes storing a copy of the > converted text pretty simple if you go that route. > > http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/Filters+Column+PluginI''ve seen this too, but the code doesn''t seem to exist anywhere. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Chris Johanesen wrote:>> There''s also a "filters_column" plugin which makes storing a copy of the >> converted text pretty simple if you go that route. >> >> http://wiki.rubyonrails.org/rails/pages/Filters+Column+Plugin > > I''ve seen this too, but the code doesn''t seem to exist anywhere.The Subversion repository still works for me, which is where I believe I got it from originally.... http://yayforgecko.com/svn/filters_column/ -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
I''ve installed it, and I added the following line to my view: <%= textilize(post.text) %> I got this error, though: "uninitialized constant RedCloth". Ideas? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Did you restart your webserver? _Kevin On Friday, March 24, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Andrea Gandino wrote:>I''ve installed it, and I added the following line to my view: > ><%= textilize(post.text) %> > >I got this error, though: "uninitialized constant RedCloth". > >Ideas? > >-- >Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. >_______________________________________________ >Rails mailing list >Rails@lists.rubyonrails.org >http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-- Posted with http://DevLists.com. Sign up and save your time!