Imgur album oneboxing (partially) broken



  • Links to imgur album generally don't onebox

    But sometimes, for example when I click "edit" on that post, they appear.

    Or immediately after pasting the link on the editor

    But after a few keypresses it's gone



  • this is an outsourced bug, we basically need to write custom embed code for imgur albums because they fucked theirs up



  • Question: has HTML5 still not fixed the problem of securely embedding third-party content on your website?



  • Well, <iframe sandbox> doesn't work, because posts can't be dynamically resized or the page fucks up.



  • And the content of the iframe is allowed to resize it and fuck with the page? Or you mean that it's bad because the content can't resize it to show bigger posts?

    The way I imagine it should work is the target server gives you the size of the embed page somehow, then you create the iframe with that size (limited to a maximum of course) and the size stays fixed.



  • It's more of, we don't know what size the iframe should be at post baking time. If you make a guess, it'll be over or under at some point unless it's a fixed size.



  • So couldn't there be a standard meta tag that defines an URL (with the embeddable version of the page) and a size, and you make an iframe with those properties?



  • How?



  • <iframe seamless sandbox src="https://something/"></iframe>
    

  • sockdevs

    @ben_lubar said:

    ```

    <iframe seamless sandbox src="https://something/"></iframe> ```

    and there's no way that will get abused....



  • First of all, you don't need "seamless" because you can just CSS-away the default border.

    Secondly, I'm not sure how an iframe could be more sandboxed than they are already (assuming the iframe contents are coming from a different domain.) If you want to "trick" the browser into serving up a sandboxed iframe on the same domain, well, domains are cheap, buy a second one.

    In short, I do not get the point of your proposed syntax.





  • @blakeyrat said:

    First of all, you don't need "seamless" because you can just CSS-away the default border.

    Quoting for the benefit of others:

    This Boolean attribute indicates that the browser should render the inline frame in a way that makes it appear to be part of the containing document, for example by applying CSS styles that apply to the <iframe> to the contained document before styles specified in that document, and by opening links in the contained documents in the parent browsing context (unless another setting prevents this). In XHTML, attribute minimization is forbidden, and the seamless attribute must be defined as <iframe seamless="seamless">.



  • Bah I am too grumpy for this HTML5 whiz-bang-ery.

    Give me good ol' HTML 3.2 any day.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Give me good ol' HTML 3.2 any day.

    FUCK YOU WHY DO YOU NOT WANT TO ADVANCE PAST THE 90S GODDAMNED LUDDITES


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.