Ensure that the RendererWorker version matches the API version, and reduce the size of the *built* pdf.renderer.mjs file (PR 21860 follow-up)

[Snuffleupagus]

• Ensure that the RendererWorker version matches the API version (PR 21860 follow-up)

  While the actual implementation differs slightly from the "normal" worker, since the new RendererWorker only supports one document, the basic principle is the same.
  By ensuring that the API and worker versions match, we prevent any possible issues that could occur e.g. as a result of caching, which should help prevent strange and hard to debug errors in third-party PDF.js deployments.

• Split DOMCanvasFactory and OffscreenCanvasFactory into separate files (PR 21860 follow-up)

  This avoids bundling dead code in the built pdf.mjs and pdf.renderer.mjs files.

  Note: This reduces the size of the gulp mozcentral bundle by 487 bytes, which isn't a lot but still cannot hurt.

• Split DOMFilterFactory and WorkerFilterFactory into separate files (PR 21860 follow-up)

  This avoids bundling dead code in the built pdf.mjs and pdf.renderer.mjs files.

  Note: This reduces the size of the gulp mozcentral bundle by 11898 bytes, i.e. over 11 kilo-bytes, which is way too much to ignore.

[github-actions]

Reference tests

Results for 7765947 (run, references from mozilla/pdf.js.refs@a0031ac7e2).

Platform	Status	Tests	Total runtime	Errors	Different	FBF	No reference	Report
	⚠️	1382	11m 57s	0	1	0	0	view differences
	⚠️	1382	16m 23s	0	1	0	0	view differences

The report is kept for 30 days and replaced by the next run.

Problems on Linux

TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | test failed issue16114-partial | in firefox-1 | page1 round 1 | Optimized rendering differs from full rendering.

Problems on Windows

TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | test failed issue16114-partial | in firefox-0 | page1 round 1 | Optimized rendering differs from full rendering.
TEST-UNEXPECTED-FAIL | test failed firefox-1 has not responded in 120s

[github-actions]

Viewer preview

🗑️ Viewer previews removed.

[calixteman]

LGTM. Thank you.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 76.35659% with 61 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 90.22%. Comparing base (61b7f9a) to head (7765947).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/display/dom_filter_factory.js	75.81%	59 Missing ⚠️
src/display/api.js	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #22097      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.20%   90.22%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         271      274       +3     
  Lines       67790    67795       +5     
==========================================
+ Hits        61151    61167      +16     
+ Misses       6639     6628      -11     

Flag	Coverage Δ
browsertest	66.14% <56.58%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
fonttest	8.95% <ø> (ø)
integrationtest	70.03% <60.07%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
unittest	59.89% <10.07%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
unittestcli	58.27% <0.78%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.