Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] consider allowing a non-scope identifier for registrations (#1512)

> I guess it would reject if a service worker changed scope to a scope that already existed on the origin?

It could, but I think it would be consistent with current behavior to unregister the `sw2.js` registration in your example.

Tangentially related to this is something I've been thinking about for the scopes pattern matching effort.  If we add multiple scope strings for a registration (as recommended from the TPAC meeting), then the overlapping scope scenario here could have just a partial overlap.  I think we would probably want to treat them the same as what we do here, though; error or replace.

> As a compatibility path, what if id defaults to the scope?

This makes sense to me, but I haven't thought it fully through.

-- 
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/1512#issuecomment-615318937