I see the main spec PR has landed and a small related Fetch PR is done. Thanks all for doing that!
LGTM1 On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 8:55 PM Domenic Denicola <dome...@chromium.org> wrote: > 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 > <https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM0wra-BV90qWJ%2BGwnh9AJzpBhLd8dnqBFCivsUOuAr1-8nmUA%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/CAOMQ%2Bw8CC2LPRYmj3zWjOWY3LnA%2B7QnBHDkx0UFkuwkxooTApw%40mail.gmail.com.
