Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] scope pattern matching (#1468)

I guess I don't understand the concern.  There are already limitations on what you can do with a service worker scope that are not obvious from the register() method.  For example, we reject if the scope and script location are not in the proper relation to each other.  I think the proposed restrictions for pattern scopes are much easier to understand than that.  No matter what developers have to read the API documentation beyond just looking at the signature of the register() method.

Also I think there is a very strong ecosystem case to moving the web platform to a shared syntax that also is intuitive to developers.  Having a shared primitive moves us in that direction, at least for new API surfaces.  @kenchris, did you discuss this sort of thing in the [TAG review](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/417) at all?

In any case, it would be great if you could provide a more concrete counter proposal of what you think would be better.  In the abstract its very hard for me to understand what end state you would prefer.

-- 
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/1468#issuecomment-707170164