[java][dotnet][js] Fix failing BiDi related tests

[pujagani]

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

Prepping for the release

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

Bug fix, Tests

---

Description

• Fixed BiDi-related test failures across Java, .NET, and JavaScript.

• Updated EvaluateParameters to remove userActivation in Java and .NET tests.

• Adjusted JavaScript test to ignore specific browsers for fragment navigation.

• Improved test consistency and alignment with specifications.

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

Relevant files

Tests

CallFunctionParameterTest.java Adjusted `EvaluateParameters` usage in Java tests                java/test/org/openqa/selenium/bidi/script/CallFunctionParameterTest.java Removed userActivation parameter in EvaluateParameters. Ensured consistent evaluation of scripts in tests. +1/-2      EvaluateParametersTest.java Simplified script evaluation in Java tests                              java/test/org/openqa/selenium/bidi/script/EvaluateParametersTest.java Removed userActivation parameter in EvaluateParameters. Simplified script evaluation logic in tests. +1/-2      CallFunctionParameterTest.cs Updated BiDi script evaluation in .NET tests                          dotnet/test/common/BiDi/Script/CallFunctionParameterTest.cs Removed UserActivation parameter in EvaluateAsync. Adjusted test logic for script evaluation. +1/-1      EvaluateParametersTest.cs Enhanced script evaluation tests in .NET                                  dotnet/test/common/BiDi/Script/EvaluateParametersTest.cs Removed UserActivation parameter in EvaluateAsync. Improved test consistency for script evaluation. +1/-1      browsingcontext_inspector_test.js Adjusted fragment navigation test in JavaScript                    javascript/node/selenium-webdriver/test/bidi/browsingcontext_inspector_test.js Ignored fragment navigation test for Chrome and Edge. Added comments for browser-specific behavior. Improved test alignment with browser specifications. +19/-14

---

Need help?

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

Check out the documentation for more information.

[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 Test Coverage The fragment navigation test is now skipped for Chrome and Edge browsers. Consider adding alternative test coverage or documenting why this functionality cannot be tested on these browsers. ignore(env.browsers(Browser.EDGE, Browser.CHROME)).it( 'can listen to fragment navigated event', async function () { let navigationInfo = null const browsingConextInspector = await BrowsingContextInspector(driver) const browsingContext = await BrowsingContext(driver, { browsingContextId: await driver.getWindowHandle(), }) await browsingContext.navigate(Pages.linkedImage, 'complete') await browsingConextInspector.onFragmentNavigated((entry) => { navigationInfo = entry }) await browsingContext.navigate(Pages.linkedImage + '#linkToAnchorOnThisPage', 'complete') // Chrome/Edge do not return the window's browsing context id as per the spec. // This assertion fails. assert.equal(navigationInfo.browsingContextId, browsingContext.id) assert(navigationInfo.url.includes('linkToAnchorOnThisPage')) }, ) Parameter Change The userActivation parameter was removed from EvaluateParameters. Verify this change aligns with the BiDi specification and doesn't break expected browser behavior. script.evaluateFunction( new EvaluateParameters(new ContextTarget(id), "window.open();", false));

[qodo-merge-pro]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Explore these optional code suggestions:

Category	Suggestion	Impact
Possible issue	Fix inconsistent test parameter value The false parameter in evaluateFunction seems incorrect for a test named "canEvaluateScriptWithUserActivationTrue". This could lead to incorrect test behavior since it contradicts the test's intention. java/test/org/openqa/selenium/bidi/script/CallFunctionParameterTest.java [62-63] script.evaluateFunction( - new EvaluateParameters(new ContextTarget(id), "window.open();", false)); + new EvaluateParameters(new ContextTarget(id), "window.open();", true)); Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9 __ Why: The suggestion correctly identifies a critical inconsistency where the test named "canEvaluateScriptWithUserActivationTrue" uses false for user activation, which contradicts the test's purpose and could lead to incorrect test behavior.	High
	Fix contradictory test parameter Similar to the previous test, the false parameter contradicts the test method name "canEvaluateScriptWithUserActivationTrue" and could cause test failures. java/test/org/openqa/selenium/bidi/script/EvaluateParametersTest.java [56-57] script.evaluateFunction( - new EvaluateParameters(new ContextTarget(id), "window.open();", false)); + new EvaluateParameters(new ContextTarget(id), "window.open();", true)); Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 9 __ Why: The suggestion identifies the same critical issue in another test file where the parameter value contradicts the test method name, which could cause test validation failures and incorrect behavior verification.	High
Learned best practice	Enhance debugging comments by including specific details about expected versus actual behavior The comment about Chrome/Edge behavior should be more specific and include details about what the actual behavior is versus what's expected according to the spec. This helps other developers better understand the issue. javascript/node/selenium-webdriver/test/bidi/browsingcontext_inspector_test.js [161-163] -// Chrome/Edge do not return the window's browsing context id as per the spec. -// This assertion fails. +// Chrome/Edge return null for browsingContextId instead of the window's context id. +// Spec requires: browsingContextId to match the window handle. +// Actual: Chrome/Edge return null. See: https://w3c.github.io/webdriver-bidi/#navigation assert.equal(navigationInfo.browsingContextId, browsingContext.id) Apply this suggestion Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6	Low
More