Re: [w3c/ServiceWorker] Editorial: Revise reference links with bikeshed (PR #1762)

@mkruisselbrink commented on this pull request.



> @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ spec: ecma-262; urlPrefix: https://tc39.es/ecma262/
             text: statement
             text: declaration
 
+spec: html; urlPrefix: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/

I would strongly discourage adding references to other specs in the "anchors" block like this. If there are definitions in other specs that you need to reference they should be exported from the other spec, rather than worked around like this (and I think even if they aren't exported, you can still link to them without adding them to anchors by explicitly mentioning the spec).

And the same probably also applies to all the existing html fetch and storage references below.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/pull/1762#pullrequestreview-2714671090
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/ServiceWorker/pull/1762/review/2714671090@github.com>