Update for IMA v3.697.0

[Kiro705]

Updates google_interactive_media_ads_types for version IMA SDK v3.697.0.

Changes:

• Fixes AdEvent.SKIPPED to the correct string 'skip'.
• Improves definitions for AdsLoader methods 'addEventListener()' and 'removeEventListener()'.
• Removes 'AdsLoader.dispatchEvent()', which is not needed for IMA implementations.
• Improves definitions for AdsManager methods 'addEventListener()' and 'removeEventListener()'.
• Updates comment for AdsManager methods 'expand()', 'init()', and 'resize()'.
• Updates comment for AdsRenderingSettings values 'restoreCustomPlaybackStateOnAdBreakComplete' and 'uiElements'.
• Updates comment for AdsRenderingSettings values 'linearAdSlotHeight', 'linearAdSlotWidth', 'nonLinearAdSlotHeight', and 'nonLinearAdSlotWidth'.
• Updates comment for 'ImaEvent.target'.
• Removes 'ImaEventTarget' interface.
• Removes 'ViewMode' enum.
• Deprecates ImaEvent 'currentTarget' and 'preventDefault()'.
• Deprecates 'OmidAccessMode.DOMAIN'.
• Adds blank lines between entries for better readability.
• Adds 'google' prefix to comment strings like 'google.ima.AdEvent'.
• Fixes comment styling for lists.
• Updates google_interactive_media_ads_types version to match IMA SDK versions.

Please fill in this template.

• Use a meaningful title for the pull request. Include the name of the package modified.
• Test the change in your own code. (Compile and run.)
• Add or edit tests to reflect the change.
• Follow the advice from the readme.
• Avoid common mistakes.
• Run pnpm test <package to test>.

Select one of these and delete the others:

If changing an existing definition:

• Provide a URL to documentation or source code which provides context for the suggested changes: <>
• If this PR brings the type definitions up to date with a new version of the JS library, update the version number in the package.json.

[typescript-bot]

@Kiro705 Thank you for submitting this PR!

This is a live comment that I will keep updated.

1 package in this PR

• google_interactive_media_ads_types — on npm, on unpkg (author is owner)
  • 1 removed owner: @gschoppe

Code Reviews

This PR can be merged once it's reviewed by a DT maintainer.

You can test the changes of this PR in the Playground.

Status

• ✅ No merge conflicts
• ✅ Continuous integration tests have passed
• ✅ Only a DT maintainer can approve changes without tests

All of the items on the list are green. To merge, you need to post a comment including the string "Ready to merge" to bring in your changes.

---

Diagnostic Information: What the bot saw about this PR

{
  "type": "info",
  "now": "-",
  "pr_number": 72898,
  "author": "Kiro705",
  "headCommitOid": "6279ea6439924ca62a67f7bdb166805794e50bbd",
  "mergeBaseOid": "f2fcf51a0c379dc8daca803be36df971c14d5078",
  "lastPushDate": "2025-05-29T16:00:57.000Z",
  "lastActivityDate": "2025-06-04T13:46:52.000Z",
  "mergeOfferDate": "2025-06-03T17:13:20.000Z",
  "mergeRequestDate": "2025-06-04T13:46:52.000Z",
  "mergeRequestUser": "Kiro705",
  "hasMergeConflict": false,
  "isFirstContribution": false,
  "tooManyFiles": false,
  "hugeChange": false,
  "popularityLevel": "Well-liked by everyone",
  "pkgInfo": [
    {
      "name": "google_interactive_media_ads_types",
      "kind": "edit",
      "files": [
        {
          "path": "types/google_interactive_media_ads_types/index.d.ts",
          "kind": "definition"
        },
        {
          "path": "types/google_interactive_media_ads_types/package.json",
          "kind": "package-meta-ok"
        }
      ],
      "owners": [
        "Kiro705",
        "gschoppe"
      ],
      "addedOwners": [],
      "deletedOwners": [
        "gschoppe"
      ],
      "popularityLevel": "Well-liked by everyone"
    }
  ],
  "reviews": [
    {
      "type": "approved",
      "reviewer": "jakebailey",
      "date": "2025-06-03T17:12:41.000Z",
      "isMaintainer": true
    }
  ],
  "mainBotCommentID": 2919866250,
  "ciResult": "pass"
}

[typescript-bot]

🔔 @Kiro705 — you're the only owner, but it would still be good if you find someone to review this PR in the next few days, otherwise a maintainer will look at it. (And if you do find someone, maybe even recruit them to be a second owner to make future changes easier...)

[typescript-bot]

@Kiro705 Unfortunately, this pull request currently has a merge conflict 😥. Please update your PR branch to be up-to-date with respect to master. Have a nice day!

[typescript-bot]

Hey @Kiro705,

😒 Your PR doesn't modify any tests, so it's hard to know what's being fixed, and your changes might regress in the future. Please consider adding tests to cover the change you're making. Including tests allows this PR to be merged by yourself and the owners of this module.

This can potentially save days of time for you!

[typescript-bot]

🔔 @gschoppe — please review this PR in the next few days. Be sure to explicitly select Approve or Request Changes in the GitHub UI so I know what's going on.

[jakebailey]

This versioning goes backwards and so nobody will get this update. Did you mean to set a different version?

[Kiro705]

Yes, the version should change. In the initial release I mistakenly used the date to create the version number, but I think it makes more sense to match this version number to the IMA SDK version number (https://developers.google.com/interactive-media-ads/docs/sdks/html5/client-side/history)

Would it be reasonable to instead change the major number as well, so the new version would be "2.36970.9999"?

Open to other suggestions as well.

[jakebailey]

Yes. You'd have to bump the major.

[Kiro705]

Thanks, I updated the version to 2.36970.9999. Moving forward, the version number will continue to match the latest IMA SDK version number.

[jakebailey]

Seems fine, but why not just 3.697?

[jakebailey]

I ask mainly because you've mapped 3.697.0 to 36970, which if bumped according to semver on your side, could turn into 3.697.10, so 369710, which would be out of order again when 3.698.0 comes around again and is mapped to 36980. It seems like it would make more sense to just have the types version match your package's version?

[Kiro705]

I could do that as well. The IMA SDK version is 3.697.0, would it make more sense to use 3.6970.9999 for the type definition version?

[jakebailey]

3.697.9999 would make the most sense, as it's unlikely a patch version would change an API. This is how regular npm packages are tracked (as they have semver versions too).

[Kiro705]

Sounds good, I'll update it to 3.697.9999. I agree that patch version can be ignored since it shouldn't change the APIs. Thanks for the help.

[typescript-bot]

@Kiro705 One or more reviewers has requested changes. Please address their comments. I'll be back once they sign off or you've pushed new commits. Thank you!

[typescript-bot]

@jakebailey Thank you for reviewing this PR! The author has pushed new commits since your last review. Could you take another look and submit a fresh review?

[typescript-bot]

@Kiro705: Everything looks good here. I am ready to merge this PR (at 6279ea6) on your behalf whenever you think it's ready.

If you'd like that to happen, please post a comment saying:

Ready to merge

and I'll merge this PR almost instantly. Thanks for helping out! ❤️

(@gschoppe: you can do this too.)

[Kiro705]

Ready to merge