Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] should clients.claim() control reserved Clients? (#1090)

> A corner case that I'm concerned about is when the reserved client's active service worker is handling the main resource fetch while a new active worker is claiming. (The reserved client is considered being controlled already.) If this reserved client is excluded from clients.claim() of a new active worker, only this reserved client will have a different controller (likely a redundant worker) from other clients that are under the same registration's scope.

I think that is a different case.  The new SW will not move to active if there is a controlled Client.  It can use `skipWaiting()` to automatically take control of already controlled Clients.  As you point out, those algorithms should probably apply to reserved Clients.

As I understand it `clients.claim()` is only about taking control of Clients that are not already controlled.

Its unclear to me what the intent is if the Client is controlled by a different service worker registration due to overlapping scopes.  @jakearchibald, what did you intend there?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1090#issuecomment-288415298