search

WICG / web-app-launch

Web App Launch Handler
Other
75 stars 28 forks source link

Consider removing navigate_existing_client #45

Closed kenchris closed 2 years ago

kenchris commented 2 years ago

In response to https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/683

Is navigate_existing_client expected to received more values in the future (beyond always and never).

If not, couldn't we do "route_to": "existing-client-replace" or similar?

This just feels like one additional option for one specific routing option

alancutter commented 2 years ago

navigate_existing_client is quite awkward naming and semantics wise. I'm quite open to considering other options.

It is open to receiving more options in the future (e.g. URL filtering) but I can't think of a solid use case to justify any such extensions.

Would your suggestion be something like "route_to": "new-client" | "existing-client-replace" | "existing-client-retain" | "service-worker"?

kenchris commented 2 years ago

Yes, that was my indention. I think the meaning is pretty clear for developers this way and non indirectly implied.

alancutter commented 2 years ago

SGTM.

tomayac commented 2 years ago

+1, I had similar feelings when working on the (in-progress) article (https://github.com/GoogleChrome/web.dev/pull/6908).