This patch updates the minimum supported browsers as follows:
- Google Chrome 110, which was released on 2023-02-07; see https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2023/02/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html
Note that nowadays we usually try, where feasible and possible, to support browsers that are about two years old. By limiting support to only "recent" browsers we reduce the risk of holding back improvements of the *built-in* Firefox PDF Viewer, and also (significantly) reduce the maintenance/support burden for the PDF.js contributors.
*Please note:* As always, the minimum supported browser version assumes that a `legacy`-build of the PDF.js library is being used; see https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js/wiki/Frequently-Asked-Questions#faq-support
Currently we have three separate and virtually identical message handlers for this data, which can easily be combined into a single message handler instead.
Automatically detect links in the text content of a file and automatically
generate link annotations at the appropriate locations to achieve
automatic link detection and hyperlinking.
With recent changed made to the GitHub issues-UI the "Blank issue" alternative is now showing up quite prominently, which can easily negate the point of our bug/feature templates and lead to incomplete issues being filed.
Given that we now have a few different factory-url parameters, we introduce a helper function for parsing them.
*Please note:* These parameters have always been documented as requiring a trailing slash[1], which we can now easily enforce during the `getDocument`-call.
---
[1] I recall that we've occasionally seen issues because users miss that detail, and the new Error should hopefully be more easily actionable than one thrown during rendering/parsing.
This pattern was already followed quite consistently outside of the
freetext editor integration tests, so this commit aligns the remaining
places for consistency. This also helps to make the tests more compact
and to reduce the number of changes in follow-up changes.
In most integration tests we already use the pattern of defining the
editor selector once and reusing it in the rest of the test, but it's
not fully consistent everywhere yet. This commit fixes that for the
freetext editor integration tests, which has multiple advantages:
- it improves consistency between the various editor integration tests;
- it removes duplicate function calls and aligns variable definitions;
- it reduces the number of `getEditorSelector` calls that contained
hardcoded IDs, which helps to isolate the tests and to simplify
follow-up patches.
This CSS feature is now available in *most* browsers that we support, with old Chromium-based browsers being the only exception; please see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/color_value/color-mix#browser_compatibility
From this data we see that the feature in question has been supported since Chrome 111, which was released on 2023-03-01 (i.e. almost two years ago).
Please note that we've never guaranteed that all features and functionality will be available in the oldest supported browsers.
Furthermore, even with the `color-mix` fallback removed PopupAnnotations will still function just as before but may render with the default color (defined in the CSS-file) rather than the one specified in the PDF document.
In most integration tests we already use the pattern of defining the
editor selector once and reusing it in the rest of the test, but it's
not fully consistent everywhere yet. This commit fixes that for the
highlight editor integration tests, which has multiple advantages:
- it improves consistency between the various editor integration tests;
- it removes duplicate function calls and aligns variable definitions;
- it reduces the number of `getEditorSelector` calls that contained
hardcoded IDs, which helps to isolate the tests and to simplify
follow-up patches.
At the time of PR 12896 the `fontBoundingBox{Ascent, Descent}` properties were not yet available by default in Fírefox, however that's no longer the case since Firefox 116; please see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1801198.
Hence this patch which replaces the "full" fallback with a warning and uses the `ascent`/`descent` values from the fonts in the PDF document (as we did previously). Obviously the TextLayer won't look as good in that case, but it's a simpler and shorter solution.
