Re: [slightlyoff/ServiceWorker] Don't associate a job with a client, instead just have a referrer. (#889)

>          <dt><em>"<code>module</code>"</em></dt>
> -        <dd><p><a>Fetch a module script tree</a> given <var>job</var>’s <a>serialized</a> <a href="#dfn-job-script-url">script url</a>, "<code>omit</code>", "<code>serviceworker</code>", and <var>job</var>’s <a href="#dfn-job-client">client</a>.</p></dd>
> +        <dd><p><a>Fetch a module script tree</a> given <var>job</var>’s <a>serialized</a> <a href="#dfn-job-script-url">script url</a>, "<code>omit</code>", "<code>serviceworker</code>", and some settings object.</p></dd>

@domenic any suggestions on how to best address this? For dedicated and shared workers a settings object is created for the worker before "fetch a module script tree" is invoked, and then that settings object is used to get a module map to store the fetched modules on. For service workers we generally don't create a settings object until the worker actually is started. 

Also I would somewhat expect the main script of a module worker to be fetched with the document/worker that created the worker as referrer, similar to how class workers use that as referrer. With the current spec of "Fetch a module script tree" that isn't possible/what happens though. All modules, including the main module of a worker are fetched with the worker itself as referrer.

---
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/pull/889/files/9e6c421e7a040fa5d81b1476566343c268353f4d#r60814606