Nathan Wright wrote:
> While I agree that they are an "asset" in a sense, they are also an
> asset
> with a behavior, and that certainly complicates things quite a bit.
> Depending on the technical skill (or lack thereof) of a user they could
> even bring down your site (image a bad javascript file that writes in
> pr0n
> to your page or a css file that includes the declaration "body {
> display:
> none; }"). For most purposes, I'd think that this would be giving too
> _much_ power to the average user.
I'm not sure that it's a problem in "most cases" but certainly the
developer ought to be able to say that "for this site, users won't be
able to add js but css is ok" -- or whatever.
In another site, like one I'm building where the users are trustworthy
and where it will also require approval before publishing, this is
perfectly fine.
I see it like configuring your WYSISYG editor to allow H1 tags or not,
or blockquotes -- or anything that the developer, owner wants to offer
or hide, really.
-Chris
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
_______________________________________________
Radiant mailing list
Post: [email protected]
Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
