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

> SW2 executes skipWaiting() so SW2 becomes the active worker and SW1 gets to redundant state.

I'm saying this is the bug in that case, not the claim().  The Client should not be allowed to be controlled by a redundant worker.  If skipWaiting() is called then the reserved Client must be controlled by the new worker.

-- 
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-288593364