/ Published in: Other
For some reason, Snipplr has decided not to HTML-encode <code><</code> and <code>></code> signs (i.e., replacing them with `<` and `>`) that a user inputs into a comment box, and instead strips anything that looks like a tag from the comment entirely.
So, if you enter something like <code>`<div>test</div>`</code> in the comment box, you would expect to see <code><div>test</div></code> in the post but you would actually end up with `test`.
The exceptions that I've found are `<b>`, `<i>`, `<em>`, `<strong>`, and `<code>` tags.
The only reliable way to get around this odd implementation is to use the code tag with its content already HTML-encoded, just like you would if you were writing your own HTML. So entering something like <code><code>&lt;div&gt;test&lt;/div&gt;</code></code> will give the expected result <code><div>test</div></code>.
Note that you will also have to replace the back-ticks with ```
FYI, here is the code I used to create this description itself. The same code is entered in the first comment below (note the difference where the back-ticks are used to surround this: `test`).
So, if you enter something like <code>`<div>test</div>`</code> in the comment box, you would expect to see <code><div>test</div></code> in the post but you would actually end up with `test`.
The exceptions that I've found are `<b>`, `<i>`, `<em>`, `<strong>`, and `<code>` tags.
The only reliable way to get around this odd implementation is to use the code tag with its content already HTML-encoded, just like you would if you were writing your own HTML. So entering something like <code><code>&lt;div&gt;test&lt;/div&gt;</code></code> will give the expected result <code><div>test</div></code>.
Note that you will also have to replace the back-ticks with ```
FYI, here is the code I used to create this description itself. The same code is entered in the first comment below (note the difference where the back-ticks are used to surround this: `test`).
Expand |
Embed | Plain Text
Copy this code and paste it in your HTML
The only reliable way to get around this odd implementation is to use the code tag with its content already HTML-encoded, just like you would if you were writing your own HTML. So entering something like <code><code>&lt;div&gt;test&lt;/div&gt;</code></code> will give the expected result <code><div>test</div></code>. Note that you will also have to replace the back-ticks with ```