Re: [ServiceWorker] ServiceWorkerClient to Client (#588)

Also @domenic and @Hixie. 

It seems like an interesting idea to make Client available everywhere, I had not actually considered that. I was mostly suggesting to remove the "ServiceWorker" prefix since they were scoped to service workers anyway. But this makes sense if we want the ability to open new windows using `new Client` elsewhere. Also, the `postMessage()` setup only works if these objects are in a service worker since the other side is expected to use the `ServiceWorker` object, no?

I'm not sure this satisfies the constructor camp as the user agent will still need to use the token approach to construct these objects in a way that works for user agents (e.g. otherwise there's no way to get one that returns "worker" for `type`). Given that window and worker are likely to grow apart further, overloading might not be the best way to go about this. We've been bitten by that in the past (e.g. `<object>`).

I don't really like `update`. I thought the idea was to require polling given the expected longevity of a service worker?

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/588#issuecomment-66781813