[WebExtensions] Chrome 150 plans to limit alarm name lengths#43933
[WebExtensions] Chrome 150 plans to limit alarm name lengths#43933
Conversation
|
Preview URLs (1 page) External URLs (1)URL:
(comment last updated: 2026-04-26 19:07:53) |
| Alarm names are unique within the scope of a single extension. If an alarm with an identical name exists, the existing alarm will be cleared and the alarm being created will replace it. | ||
|
|
||
| Browsers may soon limit alarm name lengths. Chrome 150 will reject alarms with names longer than 1024 bytes. Safari expressed support for this limit. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bershanskiy could you also add a note to the BCD?
| From Chrome 150, alarms with names longer than 1024 bytes are rejected. This limit may be implemented on other browsers. See [Proposal: Limits on lengths of strings passed to WebExtension APIs](https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/issues/935) for more information. |
Chrome 148 introduced a console warning for alarm names longer than 1024 bytes.[1] Safari devs believe "1024 is a good limit".[2] Firefox will likely "take a wait and see approach".[3] Sources: [1] chromium/chromium@432c30e [2] w3c/webextensions#935 (comment) [3] https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/blob/main/_minutes/2026-03-12-wecg.md
|
@oliverdunk Courtesy ping in case you would like to review this change. |
|
@bershanskiy Normally, we just add a note under the Chrome entry for alarm.create, along the lines of |
This SGTM. No strong feelings on the wording or where this is noted. |
I updated mdn/browser-compat-data#29521 accordingly (updated commit, commit message, and force-pushed). Please let me know if I need to do anything else. |
rebloor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @bershanskiy everything looks good.
Description
Add note stating upcoming limit for extension alarm names in Google Chrome 150.
Motivation
Chrome 148 introduced a console warning for alarm names longer than 1024 bytes.[1] Safari devs believe "1024 is a good limit".[2] Firefox will likely "take a wait and see approach".[3]
Additional details
Sources:
[1] chromium/chromium@432c30e
[2] w3c/webextensions#935 (comment)
[3] https://github.com/w3c/webextensions/blob/main/_minutes/2026-03-12-wecg.md
Related issues and pull requests
w3c/webextensions#422