[tantek], gRegor, [schmarty] and [snarfed] joined the channel
#[snarfed]GWG I don't understand the problem yet. are you sure you do? you'll probably want to get an example before you jump to a solution
[jacky] joined the channel
#GWG[snarfed]: Agreed, just wondering if I should implement a default tag filter, and figured you'd given it thought.
#[snarfed]by tag filter, do you mean for HTML sanitization?
#[snarfed]for what use case? Bridgy Publish itself doesn't need to sanitize HTML
bterry1 joined the channel
#GWG[snarfed]: Yes. Just wondering if you did any sanitization
petermolnar, [KevinMarks], jeremycherfas, jeremy, bterry, pmlnr1, Guest6, gRegor, jjuran, fdsaf, IWSlackGateway and [snarfed] joined the channel; petermolnar left the channel
#[snarfed]Bridgy Publish emits plain text, not HTML, so it doesn't sanitize HTML, it converts it to plain text
#GWG[snarfed]: So, is there a case for me to do the same for some targets?
#GWGThat's the big question. I intend to handle both
#GWGBoth the individual problems and try to make some default decisions
#[snarfed]right. I stil don't fully understand either their problem or your more general interest in sanitizing HTML. the one place I can think of where your plugin(s) render untrusted external HTML is webmention display, which you're not thinking about here, right?
#[snarfed]otherwise, we don't have a clear use case here, unless you're confident you understand their question, which I don't
[aciccarello] and geoffo joined the channel
#GWG[snarfed]: Webmention does sanitize the HTML limitedly
#[snarfed]right, like I mentioned, but that's a different plugin
[Murray] and AramZS joined the channel
#GWG[snarfed]: I am still brainstorming, so may ask for your advice further down the road. I owe pfefferle a PR now that we discussed the roadblock... I was waiting for him to comment, he was waiting for me to write it because he didn't have an issue...so communications
[tantek], geoffo, BinarySavior_ and BinarySavior joined the channel