At the moment it appears the spec is not complete, as a possibly-large chunk of behavior (regarding request/response reuse that modifies the behavior of fetch() inside service worker fetch handlers) needs to have its spec written: https://github.com/yoshisatoyanagisawa/ServiceWorker/pull/10/files#r1483835014
On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:39 AM Yoshisato Yanagisawa < yyanagis...@chromium.org> wrote: > Do you have any other questions? concerns? comments? > There were many Intent to Ship/Experiment emails at the same time, and I > am afraid this mail thread was overlooked. > > > 2024年2月9日(金) 14:20 Yoshisato Yanagisawa <yyanagis...@chromium.org>: > >> >> >> 2024年2月9日(金) 13:20 Vladimir Levin <vmp...@chromium.org>: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2024, 22:56 Yoshisato Yanagisawa < >>> yyanagis...@chromium.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Contact emails >>>> >>>> yyanagis...@chromium.org, sisidov...@chromium.org >>>> >>>> Explainer >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api >>>> >>>> Specification >>>> >>>> https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/pull/1701 >>>> >>>> Summary >>>> >>>> This API allows developers to configure the routing, and allows them to >>>> offload simple things ServiceWorkers do. If the condition matches, the >>>> navigation happens without starting ServiceWorkers or executing JavaScript, >>>> which allows web pages to avoid performance penalties due to ServiceWorker >>>> interceptions. >>>> >>>> >>>> Blink component >>>> >>>> Blink>ServiceWorker >>>> <https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component:Blink%3EServiceWorker> >>>> >>>> TAG review >>>> >>>> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/863 >>>> >>>> TAG review status >>>> >>>> Issues addressed >>>> >>>> Chromium Trial Name >>>> >>>> ServiceWorkerStaticRouter >>>> >>>> Link to origin trial feedback summary >>>> >>>> >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mE3tngHQdz0s66Z_iIGksFxQui3taogP8pDafLUHMEg/edit#heading=h.ia9i7k1ocjnq >>>> >>> >>> I just want to say that it's heartening to see OT feedback being taken >>> seriously and addressed in rigorous manner. >>> >> >> Thank you. >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> Origin Trial documentation link >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api?tab=readme-ov-file#origin-trial >>>> >>>> Risks >>>> >>>> Interoperability and Compatibility >>>> >>>> Gecko: Positive ( >>>> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/828) >>>> >>>> WebKit: No signal ( >>>> https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/206) Informal >>>> positive signals at TPAC, but no official standards position. >>>> >>> >>> It seems like the only concerns with this proposal (in TAG and >>> elsewhere) was the status of URLPattern in the spec, but that has been >>> since resolved. Is this your understanding as well? >>> >>> >> Yes. I think we are on the same page. >> As I have left a comment in the WebKit link, URLPattern has already >> become the standard, and is actively maintained. >> >> >>> >>>> Web developers: Positive ( >>>> https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/issues/1373) We see many positive >>>> signals and feedback from developers on the Github issue and other places >>>> (e.g. >>>> https://jakearchibald.com/2019/service-worker-declarative-router/#disqus_thread). >>>> Also, we have partners who participated in the OT (feedback >>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mE3tngHQdz0s66Z_iIGksFxQui3taogP8pDafLUHMEg/edit#heading=h.ia9i7k1ocjnq> >>>> ). >>>> >>>> Other signals: >>>> >>>> WebView application risks >>>> >>>> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such >>>> that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >>>> >>>> Authors don’t foresee any obvious issue with WebView. WebView supports >>>> ServiceWorkers, and any existing applications would not be affected unless >>>> they opt-in to the static routing API explicitly. >>>> >>>> >>>> Debuggability >>>> >>>> The registered router rules are visible via >>>> chrome://serviceworker-internals and the DevTools application panel. The >>>> matched rule can be seen in the size field of the DevTools network panel. >>>> >>>> >>>> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, >>>> Mac, Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)? >>>> >>>> Yes >>>> >>>> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >>>> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >>>> ? >>>> >>>> Yes >>>> >>>> >>>> https://wpt.fyi/results/service-workers/service-worker/tentative/static-router?label=master&label=experimental&aligned >>>> >>>> >>>> https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/service-workers/service-worker/tentative/static-router/?q=service-workers%2Fservice-worker%2Ftentative%2Fstatic-router >>>> >>>> >>>> Flag name on chrome://flags >>>> >>>> #service-worker-static-router >>>> >>>> Finch feature name >>>> >>>> ServiceWorkerStaticRouter >>>> >>>> Requires code in //chrome? >>>> >>>> False >>>> >>>> Tracking bug >>>> >>>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1371756 >>>> >>>> Launch bug >>>> >>>> https://launch.corp.google.com/launch/4261120 >>>> >>>> Measurement >>>> >>>> The number of partners who started to use the API in their production. >>>> UKM's LCP and the partner's business metrics. UseCounter: >>>> ServiceWorkerStaticRouter_AddRoutes and ServiceWorkerStaticRouter_Evaluate >>>> >>>> Availability expectation >>>> >>>> Feature will eventually be available on Web Platform mainline. The >>>> URLPattern became the standard, and currently no concerns exist. >>>> >>>> Adoption expectation >>>> >>>> Feature is considered as a best practice to mitigate the ServiceWorker >>>> performance issue on its cold start. Several internal/external partners >>>> have already started trying the feature during the OT, and some of them see >>>> performance improvement. They are expected to use the feature within 12 >>>> months of launch in Chrome. >>>> >>>> Adoption plan >>>> >>>> We have already started the incubation process with several partners. >>>> We intend to move them forward to help them launch. By using the results as >>>> case studies, we intend to expand usage by helping libraries support the >>>> API. >>>> >>>> Non-OSS dependencies >>>> >>>> Does the feature depend on any code or APIs outside the Chromium open >>>> source repository and its open-source dependencies to function? >>>> >>>> n/a >>>> >>>> Estimated milestones >>>> >>>> Shipping on desktop >>>> >>>> 123 >>>> >>>> OriginTrial desktop last >>>> >>>> 121 >>>> >>>> OriginTrial desktop first >>>> >>>> 116 >>>> >>>> Shipping on Android >>>> >>>> 123 >>>> >>>> OriginTrial Android last >>>> >>>> 121 >>>> >>>> OriginTrial Android first >>>> >>>> 116 >>>> >>>> OriginTrial webView last >>>> >>>> 121 >>>> >>>> OriginTrial webView first >>>> >>>> 116 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Anticipated spec changes >>>> >>>> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat or >>>> interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github issues >>>> in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may >>>> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure of >>>> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >>>> >>>> Limit the size of rules. >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api/issues/5 >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api/issues/6 >>>> >>>> If the limit is large enough to cover the relevant usages, it should >>>> not be a source of issues. >>>> >>>> Timing Info >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api/issues/19 >>>> >>>> The timing info for the API will be decided in a backward-compatible >>>> way. It should not be a source of issues. >>>> >>>> Making subsequent subresource request uses the navigation request’s >>>> source >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api/issues/7 >>>> >>>> This can be implemented as another condition, and should not break >>>> backward compatibility. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api/blob/main/final-form.md >>>> >>>> tells conditions and sources that can be added in the future. The time >>>> condition and conditional syntaxes are not implemented yet. Also, some >>>> sources are considered to have fields. However, they should come as new >>>> conditions / sources, it should not break backward compatibility. >>>> >>>> >>>> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >>>> >>>> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5185352976826368 >>>> >>>> Links to previous Intent discussions >>>> >>>> Intent to prototype: >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/fyvsde2ay2A/m/RH9E8hB0AgAJ >>>> Intent to Experiment: >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAGMyg-abNsH2mfBw3%2BiaJgMn3SKCEzBzw0FuMudbmQ9XhkjEVg%40mail.gmail.com >>>> >>>> Intent to Extend Experiment: >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/gTy-fpBOXDM >>>> >>>> Intent to Ship: >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/gTy-fpBOXDM >>>> >>>> >>>> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >>>> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "blink-dev" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAPNB-6WZdPweNTAvcG4k3kuB9EzV2AbGVme4Byxzg%2BRKganb2Q%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAPNB-6WZdPweNTAvcG4k3kuB9EzV2AbGVme4Byxzg%2BRKganb2Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "blink-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAPNB-6XPVmcMvKV1_wmjG9%2B6sTZ8RabDOJK6dPk7xR20TmvrXQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAPNB-6XPVmcMvKV1_wmjG9%2B6sTZ8RabDOJK6dPk7xR20TmvrXQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM0wra-BV90qWJ%2BGwnh9AJzpBhLd8dnqBFCivsUOuAr1-8nmUA%40mail.gmail.com.
