[js][bidi]: implement permissions module commands in JS

[navin772]

User description

Thanks for contributing to Selenium!
A PR well described will help maintainers to quickly review and merge it

Before submitting your PR, please check our contributing guidelines.
Avoid large PRs, help reviewers by making them as simple and short as possible.

Motivation and Context

Implement commands from extension module permissions - https://www.w3.org/TR/permissions/#automation-webdriver-bidi

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist

• I have read the contributing document.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

---

PR Type

Enhancement, Tests

---

Description

• Implemented BiDi permissions module for JavaScript.

• Added support for setting permission states programmatically.

• Developed comprehensive tests for permission module functionality.

• Ensured compatibility with multiple browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Edge).

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

	Relevant files
Enhancement	permissions.js Implement BiDi permissions module functionality                    javascript/node/selenium-webdriver/bidi/permissions.js Added a Permission class to manage BiDi permissions. Implemented setPermission method to set permission states. Introduced PermissionState constants for state validation. Exported getPermissionInstance for external usage. +73/-0
Tests	permissions_test.js Add tests for BiDi permissions module                                        javascript/node/selenium-webdriver/test/bidi/permissions_test.js Added tests for setting permissions to granted, denied, and prompt. Verified permission changes across different user contexts. Ensured compatibility with browser-specific default states. Utilized BiDi APIs for browser interaction and validation. +169/-0

---

Need help?

Type /help how to ... in the comments thread for any questions about Qodo Merge usage.

Check out the documentation for more information.

[navin772]

For Chrome, the permission module tests pass from Chrome 134 onwards, which is currently in Chrome Beta, hence the CI is currently failing.
For Firefox, the tests pass in the stable version.

[qodo-merge-pro]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

Here are some key observations to aid the review process:

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 2 🔵🔵⚪⚪⚪

🧪 PR contains tests

🔒 No security concerns identified

⚡ Recommended focus areas for review Error Handling The setPermission method validates permission states but doesn't validate the permissionDescriptor or origin parameters. Consider adding validation for these parameters to prevent potential runtime errors. async setPermission(permissionDescriptor, state, origin, userContext = null) { if (!Object.values(PermissionState).includes(state)) { throw new Error(`Invalid permission state. Must be one of: ${Object.values(PermissionState).join(', ')}`) } const command = { method: 'permissions.setPermission', params: { descriptor: permissionDescriptor, state: state, origin: origin, }, } if (userContext) { command.params.userContext = userContext } await this.bidi.send(command) } Documentation The permissionDescriptor parameter lacks detailed documentation about its expected structure. Consider adding JSDoc that specifies the required format and possible values for this object. /** * Sets a permission state for a given permission descriptor. * @param {Object} permissionDescriptor The permission descriptor. * @param {string} state The permission state (granted, denied, prompt). * @param {string} origin The origin for which the permission is set. * @param {string} [userContext] The user context id (optional). * @returns {Promise<void>} */

[qodo-merge-pro]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Explore these optional code suggestions:

Category	Suggestion	Impact
Possible issue	Validate required parameters The method doesn't validate that permissionDescriptor and origin are provided and valid. Missing validation could lead to confusing errors from the BiDi protocol. Add checks to ensure these required parameters are present and valid. javascript/node/selenium-webdriver/bidi/permissions.js [45-64] async setPermission(permissionDescriptor, state, origin, userContext = null) { + if (!permissionDescriptor || typeof permissionDescriptor !== 'object') { + throw new Error('Permission descriptor must be a non-null object') + } + + if (!origin || typeof origin !== 'string') { + throw new Error('Origin must be a non-empty string') + } + if (!Object.values(PermissionState).includes(state)) { throw new Error(`Invalid permission state. Must be one of: ${Object.values(PermissionState).join(', ')}`) } const command = { method: 'permissions.setPermission', params: { descriptor: permissionDescriptor, state: state, origin: origin, }, } if (userContext) { command.params.userContext = userContext } await this.bidi.send(command) } Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 __ Why: The suggestion adds important input validation for permissionDescriptor and origin parameters, which prevents potential runtime errors and improves the robustness of the API. This is a significant improvement for error prevention.	Medium
General	Add error handling The init() method is called but there's no error handling. If initialization fails (e.g., if the driver doesn't support BiDi), the error will propagate to the caller without context. Add try-catch to provide a more informative error message. javascript/node/selenium-webdriver/bidi/permissions.js [67-71] async function getPermissionInstance(driver) { - let instance = new Permission(driver) - await instance.init() - return instance + try { + let instance = new Permission(driver) + await instance.init() + return instance + } catch (error) { + throw new Error(`Failed to initialize Permission instance: ${error.message}`) + } } Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 5 __ Why: The suggestion adds helpful error handling to the getPermissionInstance function, which would make debugging easier by providing more context when initialization fails. This is a moderate improvement for code robustness.	Low
	Use consistent property naming The init() method sets this.bidi as a public property but it should be private since it's an internal implementation detail. Use a private property naming convention (underscore prefix) for consistency with _driver. javascript/node/selenium-webdriver/bidi/permissions.js [24-35] class Permission { constructor(driver) { this._driver = driver } async init() { if (!(await this._driver.getCapabilities()).get('webSocketUrl')) { throw Error('WebDriver instance must support BiDi protocol') } - this.bidi = await this._driver.getBidi() + this._bidi = await this._driver.getBidi() } Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 4 __ Why: The suggestion improves code consistency by making the bidi property private with an underscore prefix, matching the _driver property style. This is a moderate improvement for code maintainability and encapsulation.	Low
Update

[harsha509]

HI @navin772 ,
Thank you for the PR.

A couple of suggestions:

1. Let's add browser compatibility info in the docs, something like:
   @requires Chrome 134+ or equivalent browser with BiDi permissions support

2. Consider implementing permissions as a separate module since it deserves its own namespace (we could eventually support camera, microphone, geolocation, etc.)

Thanks,
Sri

[harsha509]

Thank you @navin772 !