Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] ServiceWorker static routing API (Issue #863)

> Could there be an option here to work together to specify static routing without relying on URLPattern, or to specify a fall-back?

I don't think it's a good idea to invent a second URL pattern syntax for routing on the web platform, and you need some sort of syntax for specifying URL patterns if you're to statically give a pattern for which URLs are statically routed...

> Alternatively, [is there a way forward](https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/61#issuecomment-1527486428) to bring URLPattern forward for standardization that could unblock multiple implementations?

Again, I think there's nothing blocking this besides the other implementations' interest. Chrome has done everything we can by laying out a full specification, web platform tests suite, and so on. The "way forward" is for another implementation to support standardization, and that's not something the Chrome team has control over. I'd really encourage the TAG to bring these concerns up with the other engines directly, instead of the current approach (which I see across multiple reviews) of asking Chrome team members for information on the future plans of other companies.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/863#issuecomment-1706126849
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/863/1706126849@github.com>