Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] Add a Service-Worker-Exclude Header (Issue #1690)

Thanks for filing this!

I have an extremely similar use case, where I need to be able to exclude certain paths from being handled by the service worker.

When chatting through this on [Chromium's worker-dev](https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/worker-dev/c/G4vTpgbCq5Y/m/UIlZYyu_CAAJ?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer) it was mentioned that the [static routing API](https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api) can handle this use case. 
They do not address my use case for the following reasons:

## Specificity

It's not immediately obvious to me what happens with
```javascript
addEventListener('install', (event) => {
  event.addRoutes({
      condition: {
        urlPattern: new URLPattern({pathname: "/.well-known/*"})
      },
      source: "network"
    });
}

addEventListener('install', (event) => {
  event.addRoutes({
      condition: {
        urlPattern: new URLPattern({pathname: "/.well-known/secret/*"})
      },
      source: "fetch-event"
    });
}
```

Would the route added in the second event be ignored?

## Subresource requests
My use case is about excluding the environment from the SW scope, not just the request itself.
https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api/issues/7 discusses this, but it seems like a separate primitive to enable this would be simpler.

## Deployability

Having to programmatically call `addRoute` from the SW's install event adds a lot of complexity for a platform provider that wants to enable developers to install limited service workers on their origin. A header is significantly easier to deploy.

/cc @yoshisatoyanagisawa @sisidovski  @domenic 



-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1690#issuecomment-2612333273
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1690/2612333273@github.com>