[UWP/WinUI3 Renderer]: Discard Background Image if URI is not valid #8968
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jwoo-msft
reviewed
Jul 24, 2024
jwoo-msft
approved these changes
Jul 24, 2024
jwoo-msft
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 24, 2024
…8968) * ignore background image * remove new line * add warning to text sources load * address pr feedback
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Related Issue
For MSFT folks: https://microsoft.visualstudio.com/OS/_workitems/edit/52712745
Description
Background Image with invalid URI would crash the entire app when we attempted to render it. This change addresses that and brings the behaviour on par with NodeJS renderer and drops the image in this case. + added warning for text sources for mediasource for the similar problem.
Sample Card
How Verified
Verified locally that the BackgroundImage is being discarded as well as added unit test for this scenario.
TODO: follow up on #8967