Change sanitizeCssProperty to take virtualization param like other sanitize* fns

We need sanitizeCssProperty to take an ID suffix so it can sanitize
<global-name>s.

sanitizeStylesheet and sanitizeCssSelectors take a virtualization property
with the necessary ID suffix.

This change changes sanitizeCssProperty and all callers to take the same
virtualization property and bundles base URI and the URI rewriter that all
take into the virtualization property.

This CL should not affect the semantics of a cajoled document.

[kpreid2, 2013-07-25 21:35:17]

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
File src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js:2005: cssVirtualization = {
This is duplicated code. The 'virtualization' object is already this; just add
the needed pieces to it. Maybe rename 'rewriteUri' to 'rewriteUriForCss' to
clarify the special behavior.

[MikeSamuel, 2013-07-25 22:04:37]

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
File src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js:2005: cssVirtualization = {
On 2013/07/25 21:35:17, kpreid2 wrote:
> This is duplicated code. The 'virtualization' object is already this; just add
> the needed pieces to it. Maybe rename 'rewriteUri' to 'rewriteUriForCss' to
> clarify the special behavior.

The one at L 2109?
Hmm.  I think the baseUri needs to be sensitive to setBase.
Is it kosher to use Object.create to derive cssVirtualization from
virtualization each time sanitize is called?

[kpreid2, 2013-07-25 22:10:36]

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
File src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js:2005: cssVirtualization = {
On 2013/07/25 22:04:38, MikeSamuel wrote:
> On 2013/07/25 21:35:17, kpreid2 wrote:
> > This is duplicated code. The 'virtualization' object is already this; just
add
> > the needed pieces to it. Maybe rename 'rewriteUri' to 'rewriteUriForCss' to
> > clarify the special behavior.
> 
> The one at L 2109?
> Hmm.  I think the baseUri needs to be sensitive to setBase.

Then make it .getBaseUri() or an accessor property.

> Is it kosher to use Object.create to derive cssVirtualization from
> virtualization each time sanitize is called?

Why introduce a separate object? The whole point of the virtualization object is
to be a bundle of _all_ the value-transformations and related info. I introduced
it to cut down on function parameter counts, and arbitrary invention of
specialized interfaces used in only one place.

[MikeSamuel, 2013-07-25 23:51:51]

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
File src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js:2005: cssVirtualization = {
On 2013/07/25 22:10:37, kpreid2 wrote:
> On 2013/07/25 22:04:38, MikeSamuel wrote:
> > On 2013/07/25 21:35:17, kpreid2 wrote:
> > > This is duplicated code. The 'virtualization' object is already this; just
> add
> > > the needed pieces to it. Maybe rename 'rewriteUri' to 'rewriteUriForCss'
to
> > > clarify the special behavior.
> > 
> > The one at L 2109?
> > Hmm.  I think the baseUri needs to be sensitive to setBase.
> 
> Then make it .getBaseUri() or an accessor property.
> 
> > Is it kosher to use Object.create to derive cssVirtualization from
> > virtualization each time sanitize is called?
> 
> Why introduce a separate object? The whole point of the virtualization object
is
> to be a bundle of _all_ the value-transformations and related info. I
introduced
> it to cut down on function parameter counts, and arbitrary invention of
> specialized interfaces used in only one place.

Done.

[MikeSamuel, 2013-07-25 23:58:04]

On 2013/07/25 23:51:51, MikeSamuel wrote:
>
https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
> File src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.appspot.com/11871043/diff/1/src/com/google/caja/plugin/dom...
> src/com/google/caja/plugin/domado.js:2005: cssVirtualization = {
> On 2013/07/25 22:10:37, kpreid2 wrote:
> > On 2013/07/25 22:04:38, MikeSamuel wrote:
> > > On 2013/07/25 21:35:17, kpreid2 wrote:
> > > > This is duplicated code. The 'virtualization' object is already this;
just
> > add
> > > > the needed pieces to it. Maybe rename 'rewriteUri' to 'rewriteUriForCss'
> to
> > > > clarify the special behavior.
> > > 
> > > The one at L 2109?
> > > Hmm.  I think the baseUri needs to be sensitive to setBase.
> > 
> > Then make it .getBaseUri() or an accessor property.
> > 
> > > Is it kosher to use Object.create to derive cssVirtualization from
> > > virtualization each time sanitize is called?
> > 
> > Why introduce a separate object? The whole point of the virtualization
object
> is
> > to be a bundle of _all_ the value-transformations and related info. I
> introduced
> > it to cut down on function parameter counts, and arbitrary invention of
> > specialized interfaces used in only one place.
> 
> Done.

For some reason `myvn snapshot` decided to create a new CL 1183043 instead of
updating this one.
I'm closing this.