search for: striptag

Hi, I''m new to this mailing list, so first off, a big THANK YOU for the script.aculo.us and prototype.js libraries. I''m trying to integrate script.aculo.us into an existing pretty large Javascript codebase (see http://openrecord.org). I''m running into a problem with prototype.js and the existing codebase''s use of for/in loops over an Array.

...00000 +0000 +++ js/controls.js 2006-03-02 13:46:29.000000000 +0000 @@ -628,7 +628,7 @@ onLoadedExternalText: function(transport) { Element.removeClassName(this.form, this.options.loadingClassName); this.editField.disabled = false; - this.editField.value = transport.responseText.stripTags(); + this.editField.value = transport.responseText; }, onclickCancel: function() { this.onComplete();

I''ve got a bog-standard view which displays textilized data. In the same view, I have an in_place_editor which uses load_text_url to bring in non-textilized data when editing. Now, if I have html tags in the data loaded from load_text_url, they appear to go missing. I can see the tags in the output from my controller method using the console, but the tags are not shown in the

Quick question.. I often crash my Safari when using ''Enter'' on InPlaceEditor''s for submitting. Works fine on firefox(win & Mac) - no javascript errors. Anyone else seen this behavior? (Maybe it is just my alterings of InPlaceEditor :-) Best Regards Michael Krog

...rn this.replace(/&/g,'&amp;').replace(/</g,'&lt;').replace(/>/g,'&gt;'); }, unescapeHTML: function() { - return this.replace(/&amp;/g,'&').replace(/&lt;/g,'<').replace(/&gt;/g,'>'); + return this.stripTags().replace(/&amp;/g,'&').replace(/&lt;/g,'<').replace(/&gt;/g,'>'); } }); @@ -546,7 +555,7 @@ Object.extend(String.prototype.escapeHTML, { text: document.createTextNode('') }); -with (String.prototype.escapeHTML) div.appendChild(text...

Note that one of the 8 patches (#6) will be sent separately in reply to this email, as some of the replaced lines are too long, so git won't let me send the email. However, there is nothing wrong with that patch, and it should be applied in the sequence listed below. Note also that I assume this will be tested on a clean f11 install, rather than an upgrade of an existing ovirt server