MarkupString should be respected in .cshtml files

[leotsarev]

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe the problem.

I have solution with a mix of .cshtml and .razor files (moving from MVC to mixed MVC/Razor components). I have a paradigm where my view models have HtmlString/IHtmlContent fields that could be correctly displayed in .cshtml files just be directly referencing.

HtmlString/IHtmlContent doesn't supported in Razor component, so I have to use MarkupString there.
MarkupString is more lightweight marker concept, and doesn't require framework reference to whole ASP.NET server — I like it.

However, .cshtml renderer doesn't support MarkupString, so I have to manually add Html.Raw here. I don't like it.

Describe the solution you'd like

1. MarkupString supported in .cshtml files and doesn't re-encoded.
2. Ideally, MarkupString moved even higher in dependecies stack into some MS.Ext. assembly, totally untied from ASP.NET and will become universally recognized "html marker" class.

Additional context

No response

[MackinnonBuck]

Thanks for reaching out, @leotsarev.

We're going to move this to the backlog to gauge its priority.

[leotsarev]

May be (1) could be contributed?

[halter73]

The code that renders .cshtml file does not have a reference to MarkupString, so I don't think (1) is easy. It's also not a given that having more ways to do things in .cshtml files is the right call. If MarkupString works in .cshtml files, should Html.Raw work in .razor files? Maybe, but it would be unconventional, and it would probably cause even more confusion about which API is the right one to use when they both work in both places.

I think a contribution to updating our doc comments to for both MarkupString and Html.Raw to reference to other API and which one should be used in .razor vs .cshtml files would be less controversial and more likely to get accepted.

[leotsarev]

Why MarkupString positioned so high in stack? String that contains HTML and don't required to be reencoded is very useful and universal concept. I like it to be placed in some MS.Exts assembly, so it could be:

• recognized by Blazor
• recognized by razor .cshtml
• recognized by 3rd party templaters
• returned by 3rd party sanitizers / templaters etc