Re: [ServiceWorker] Service-Worker-Allowed header (#604)

> Yes, for all the Update/Soft Update cases (ServiceWorkerContainer.register(), ServiceWorkerRegistration.update(), 24h update, navigation matching), the given registration's scope (NOT the script URL) is re-evaluated against the new max scope.

Cool. Do you mean the current spec says this, or you plan to add it? AFAIK it's not yet in the spec. Currently if the path restriction fails you only delete the registration if there is no installed worker.

> I double-checked and couldn't find misuse of those. Probably, the use of similar names, maxScope and maxScopeString, made the confusion?

It should be "Let xxx be" and "Set xxx to". Sometime there is "Let xxx to" and "Set xxx be". Minor quibble but reading spec language is hard enough as it is :)

---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/604#issuecomment-70612074