Skip to content

Fix HTML tags showing in Split details page description#88767

Merged
chuckdries merged 4 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
wildan-m:wildan/87519-split-details-html-tags
Apr 29, 2026
Merged

Fix HTML tags showing in Split details page description#88767
chuckdries merged 4 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
wildan-m:wildan/87519-split-details-html-tags

Conversation

@wildan-m
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@wildan-m wildan-m commented Apr 25, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Explanation of Change

On the Split details page for a saved split expense whose description was entered as autolink-able text (e.g. google.com), the description was rendered as raw HTML — <a href="https://google.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">google.com</a> — instead of as a clickable link.

The description of a saved transaction is stored as HTML (because getParsedComment() runs ExpensiMark at save time). DescriptionField.tsx derives iouComment from getDescription(transaction), which returns that raw HTML. The component then forwards the value to two consumers:

  • A read-only MenuItemWithTopDescription with shouldParseTitle, which runs ExpensiMark's markdown-to-HTML parser on the value. When the input is already HTML, that parser HTML-escapes the <a> tags as literal text, producing the visible &lt;a href=…&gt;google.com&lt;/a&gt;.
  • An editable TextInput type="markdown", which expects markdown and would similarly display raw HTML angle brackets when seeded from the stored transaction.

The fix wraps getDescription(transaction) with Parser.htmlToMarkdown(...) at the single shared derivation point inside DescriptionField.tsx, so both downstream consumers receive a consistent markdown string regardless of whether the underlying transaction is a draft (plain text) or a saved one (HTML). For draft transactions whose description is already plain text, htmlToMarkdown is effectively a no-op, so other flows (e.g. IOURequestStepConfirmation) are unaffected.

This restores the same HTML→markdown normalization that SplitBillDetailsPage performed via iouComment={Parser.htmlToMarkdown(splitComment ?? '')} before 3d0e61b00012e4f20c3e3d48f9e5160fb6b445a6 ("remove redundant props") removed the per-caller prop, but applies it at the new shared owner of the derivation.

Fixed Issues

$ #87519
PROPOSAL: #87519 (comment)

Tests

  1. Open a 1:1 DM with any user.
  2. Click + → Split expense → Manual.
  3. Enter an amount → Next.
  4. Click Description, enter google.com, and save it.
  5. Click Split.
  6. Open the split preview (Split details page).
  7. Verify the Description field renders google.com as a clickable blue link — not the raw text <a href="https://google.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">google.com</a>.
  8. Click the link — verify it opens https://google.com in a new tab.
  9. Repeat steps 1–7 with a description containing bold text, e.g. *hello* world. Verify the Split details page shows hello rendered in bold and world rendered as plain text — not the literal <strong>hello</strong> world string.
  10. Repeat steps 1–7 with a plain-text description that contains no markdown (e.g. lunch). Verify it still displays as lunch (no regression for plain text).
  11. From the same chat, create a non-split expense (Submit/Track) with description google.com. Verify the confirmation page still shows google.com correctly auto-linked, confirming draft-transaction flows are unaffected.

Offline tests

Same as Tests. The change is a synchronous, in-memory string normalization with no network or storage interaction, so behavior is identical online and offline.

QA Steps

Same as tests.

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message: N/A — no copy changes
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
    • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
    • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
Kapture.2026-04-25.at.14.33.56.mp4
iOS: Native
Kapture.2026-04-25.at.14.04.26.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
Kapture.2026-04-25.at.14.08.28.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Kapture.2026-04-25.at.13.57.13_compressed.mp4

@wildan-m
Normalize iouComment to markdown before rendering
5e15a63 
The description field of a saved transaction is stored as HTML
(e.g. <a href="https://google.com">google.com</a>), but
MoneyRequestConfirmationListFooter feeds it into a MenuItemWithTopDescription
with shouldParseTitle, which runs ExpensiMark markdown-to-HTML on the value.
When the input is already HTML, ExpensiMark HTML-escapes the <a> tags, so
the user sees raw <a href=...>google.com</a> text on the Split details page.

Prior to the 'remove redundant props' refactor, SplitBillDetailsPage
normalized the stored HTML with Parser.htmlToMarkdown() before passing
iouComment down. That normalization was dropped when iouComment moved to
a single internal derivation in MoneyRequestConfirmationList. Restoring
the htmlToMarkdown call at the producer keeps every downstream consumer
(shouldParseTitle menu item and type='markdown' text input) consistent
for both draft (plain text) and saved (HTML) transactions, and avoids
regressing auto-linking of bare URLs in draft confirmation flows.
@wildan-m wildan-m marked this pull request as ready for review April 25, 2026 07:38
@wildan-m wildan-m requested review from a team as code owners April 25, 2026 07:38
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from nyomanjyotisa and trjExpensify and removed request for a team and nyomanjyotisa April 25, 2026 07:38
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Apr 25, 2026

@nyomanjyotisa Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team April 25, 2026 07:38
@wildan-m wildan-m mentioned this pull request Apr 25, 2026
Open
7 tasks
trjExpensify
trjExpensify previously approved these changes Apr 27, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@trjExpensify trjExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2P split UI bug. 👍

@nyomanjyotisa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

nyomanjyotisa commented Apr 28, 2026

Not sure why my review request was removed. @MelvinBot, could you assign me as a reviewer for this PR? I’m the C+ from the original issue

@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from nyomanjyotisa April 28, 2026 01:11
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

MelvinBot commented Apr 28, 2026

👋 Done! I've re-added nyomanjyotisa as a reviewer on this PR.

nyomanjyotisa
nyomanjyotisa reviewed Apr 28, 2026
View reviewed changes
Comment thread src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList/sections/DescriptionField.tsx Outdated
Comment on lines +57 to +61
// `getDescription` returns the raw `transaction.comment.comment`, which is stored as HTML for saved
// transactions (e.g. viewing a completed split on `SplitBillDetailsPage`). Normalize to markdown so
// both downstream consumers below — the `shouldParseTitle` `MenuItemWithTopDescription` (which runs
// markdown→HTML on the value) and the editable `TextInput type="markdown"` — receive a consistent
// markdown string regardless of whether the transaction is a draft (plain text) or a saved one (HTML).
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you simplify this comment? Something like this would be enough:

    // `getDescription` returns raw `transaction.comment.comment`, which can be HTML for saved transactions.
    // We normalize to markdown so both the read-only and editable inputs receive a consistent format.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@wildan-m wildan-m Apr 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done in fd0ea27.

@nyomanjyotisa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

nyomanjyotisa commented Apr 28, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: HybridApp
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: HybridApp
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp
Android-Native.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
Android-mWeb.Chrome.mp4
iOS: HybridApp
iOS-Native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
iOS-mWeb.Safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS-Chrome.mp4

nyomanjyotisa
nyomanjyotisa approved these changes Apr 28, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from chuckdries April 28, 2026 06:51
chuckdries
chuckdries approved these changes Apr 29, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@chuckdries chuckdries left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for adding Parser tests!

@chuckdries chuckdries merged commit d91ed96 into Expensify:main Apr 29, 2026
44 checks passed
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Apr 29, 2026

🚧 @chuckdries has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Apr 29, 2026

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Apr 29, 2026

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #88767.

Android 🤖 iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-d91ed96-7486324-39044c4e210d5c43ae5a494411b8747e654c9099/index.html https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-d91ed96-7486324-c9f8cada02b21c89cb6e392b404bd838185a9320/index.html
Android iOS
Web 🕸️
https://88767.pr-testing.expensify.com
Web

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Apr 30, 2026
Open
@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Apr 30, 2026

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/chuckdries in version: 9.3.65-0 🚀

platform result
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

MelvinBot commented Apr 30, 2026

No help site changes are required for this PR.

This is a rendering bug fix — it normalizes HTML-stored transaction descriptions back to markdown in DescriptionField.tsx so the Split details page displays formatted text (e.g., clickable links, bold) instead of raw HTML tags. No user-facing workflows, feature names, labels, or settings were added or changed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@chuckdries chuckdries chuckdries approved these changes

@trjExpensify trjExpensify trjExpensify left review comments

+1 more reviewer

@nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa nyomanjyotisa approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@wildan-m wildan-m

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@wildan-m @nyomanjyotisa @MelvinBot @OSBotify @chuckdries @trjExpensify