Render report field name as HTML only when needed

[jmgraa]

Explanation of Change

Report names (and other titles) can be plain strings or HTML. Forcing the RenderHTML path on plain-text values causes unnecessary parsing overhead. By gating on Parser.isHTML inside MenuItem, titles are only run through RenderHTML when they actually contain HTML; plain text is rendered as-is. This reduces render time for fields like the report name in the money request confirmation list by ~50–60ms.

The same shouldRenderAsHTML prop is used across many surfaces - ReportField, MoneyRequestView, TaskView, SplitExpensePage, DynamicReportDetailsPage, workspace settings, and more. Moving the conditional logic into MenuItem fixes the issue once for all of them, instead of duplicating Parser.isHTML checks at every call site.

Fixed Issues

$ #95335
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. From the main screen, click the floating + (Create) button and select Create Report. Give the report a plain-text name, e.g. Weekly expenses.
2. Click the + button again → Create Report, and give this second report a name containing HTML entities, e.g. A & B expenses or Bob's expenses (A & B expenses / Bob's expenses).
3. Click the + button → Create expense (→ Manual), enter an amount, and proceed to the confirmation screen.
4. In the Report section, tap the field and select the first (plain-text) report — Weekly expenses.
5. Verify the Report field displays Weekly expenses correctly as plain text, with no raw markup.
6. Tap the Report field again and select the second (HTML-named) report — A & B expenses / Bob's expenses.
7. Verify the Report field displays the decoded name correctly — A & B expenses / Bob's expenses — and not the raw entities (A & B expenses / Bob's expenses).

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[dariusz-biela]

The change is definitely a step in the right direction, but we need to resolve a few issues related to differences in rendering.

Also update the PR description.

Add information about how you measured the performance gain.

Provide exact results showing how long it took before and after, and what the difference is.

You can also include results not only from the metrics but also from the React Profiler.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/MenuItem.tsx	90.87% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
... and 332 files with indirect coverage changes

[dariusz-biela]

It's good, but don't be afraid to leave comments wherever you make a non-obvious decision in the code.

The next person who works on this code will be grateful to you if they don't have to scour half of GitHub to understand the reasoning behind this solution.

[melvin-bot]

@truph01 Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[melvin-bot]

@mkhutornyi @mjasikowski One of you needs to copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 39e136bd2d

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[JmillsExpensify]

No product review required on this one.

[truph01]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work!

Reviewed commit: 80e5f14018

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[truph01]

Unnecessary htmlToText round-trip on plain text

When shouldRenderTitleAsHTML is false, processedTitle wraps the title in <comment> tags only for Parser.htmlToText to strip them. Could this just use convertToLTR(title ?? '') directly?

[jmgraa]

The wrap-then-strip pattern looks redundant. However, it exists because the processedTitle logic always appends , regardless of whether the output is HTML or plain text. If we remove Parser.htmlToText, the user will see literal "" tags in the text.

The truncation logic in processedTitle is awkward, but refactoring it is out of scope for this PR, so we retain the existing pipeline.