Closed bytestream closed 2 years ago
@xemlock this OK?
Hi @bytestream, yes it should suffice. Thanks!
I've just noticed that versions matrix has been modified. So after a bit of thought, I'm in strong favor of adding our own, in-library definition for this attribute, to avoid impacting dependency versions.
Superseded by #79.
This copies
CommonAttributes
changes inv4.15.0
from upstream, otherwisecontenteditable="false"
is not considered valid on HTML5 doc types.It also bumps the requirements to match ezyang/htmlpurifier in v4.15.0