Skip to content

Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

Description

@yoshisatoyanagisawa

The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

  1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
  1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
// Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
if (areConditionsSupported) {
// All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
await event.addRoutes({
condition: { or: [
{ requestMethod: "GET" },
]
},
source: "network"
});
} else {
// A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
}
  1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
await event.addRoutes([{
condition: {
or: [
{ requestMethod: "GET" }
]
},
source: "network"
// This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
}]);

This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all
       blocks
      (function() {
      function addCopyButtons() {
      document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
      if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
      codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
      var btn = document.createElement('button');
      btn.textContent = 'Copy';
      btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
      btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
      btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
      btn.onclick = function() {
      navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
      btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
      setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
      });
      };
      codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
      codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
      });
      }
      addCopyButtons();
      // Re-run on dynamic content
      var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
      observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
      })();
      }
      } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
      })();
      (function(){
      try {
      var __m = "github.com";
      var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
      Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API · Issue #1793 · w3c/ServiceWorker · GitHub
      Skip to content

      Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

      Description

      @yoshisatoyanagisawa

      The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

      For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

      To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

      1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
      const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
      console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
      console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
      
      1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
      // Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
      const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
      'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
      if (areConditionsSupported) {
      // All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
      await event.addRoutes({
      condition: { or: [
      { requestMethod: "GET" },
      ]
      },
      source: "network"
      });
      } else {
      // A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
      console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
      }
      
      1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
      await event.addRoutes([{
      condition: {
      or: [
      { requestMethod: "GET" }
      ]
      },
      source: "network"
      // This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
      requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
      }]);
      

      This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

      Metadata

      Metadata

      Assignees

      No one assigned

        Labels

        TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

        Type

        No type

        Projects

        No projects

          Milestone

          No milestone

          Relationships

          None yet

          Development

          No branches or pull requests

          Issue actions

          , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Force GitHub README to respect dark mode (function() { var style = document.createElement('style'); style.textContent = ' .markdown-body { color-scheme: dark light; } .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; } .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; } .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; } .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; } .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; } .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; } '; document.head.appendChild(style); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + ' Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API · Issue #1793 · w3c/ServiceWorker · GitHub
          Skip to content

          Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

          Description

          @yoshisatoyanagisawa

          The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

          For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

          To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

          1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
          const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
          console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
          console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
          
          1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
          // Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
          const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
          'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
          if (areConditionsSupported) {
          // All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
          await event.addRoutes({
          condition: { or: [
          { requestMethod: "GET" },
          ]
          },
          source: "network"
          });
          } else {
          // A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
          console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
          }
          
          1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
          await event.addRoutes([{
          condition: {
          or: [
          { requestMethod: "GET" }
          ]
          },
          source: "network"
          // This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
          requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
          }]);
          

          This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

          Metadata

          Metadata

          Assignees

          No one assigned

            Labels

            TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

            Type

            No type

            Projects

            No projects

              Milestone

              No milestone

              Relationships

              None yet

              Development

              No branches or pull requests

              Issue actions

              , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer (function() { var ref = document.referrer; var terms = []; if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) { var url = new URL(ref); var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p'); if (q) { terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; }); } } if (terms.length === 0) return; var style = document.createElement('style'); style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }'; document.head.appendChild(style); function highlight(node) { if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node var text = node.textContent; var found = false; terms.forEach(function(term) { var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi'); if (regex.test(text)) { found = true; var frag = document.createDocumentFragment(); var parts = text.split(regex); parts.forEach(function(part, i) { if (i % 2 === 0) { frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part)); } else { var span = document.createElement('span'); span.className = 'userscript-highlight'; span.textContent = part; frag.appendChild(span); } }); node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node); } }); } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT']; if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) { Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight); } } } highlight(document.body); // Re-highlight on dynamic content var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { mutations.forEach(function(m) { m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) { if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node); }); }); }); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + ' Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API · Issue #1793 · w3c/ServiceWorker · GitHub
              Skip to content

              Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

              Description

              @yoshisatoyanagisawa

              The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

              For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

              To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

              1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
              const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
              console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
              console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
              
              1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
              // Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
              const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
              'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
              if (areConditionsSupported) {
              // All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
              await event.addRoutes({
              condition: { or: [
              { requestMethod: "GET" },
              ]
              },
              source: "network"
              });
              } else {
              // A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
              console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
              }
              
              1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
              await event.addRoutes([{
              condition: {
              or: [
              { requestMethod: "GET" }
              ]
              },
              source: "network"
              // This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
              requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
              }]);
              

              This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

              Metadata

              Metadata

              Assignees

              No one assigned

                Labels

                TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

                Type

                No type

                Projects

                No projects

                  Milestone

                  No milestone

                  Relationships

                  None yet

                  Development

                  No branches or pull requests

                  Issue actions

                  , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page (function() { var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content', 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid', 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign']; function cleanUrl(url) { try { var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin); var changed = false; trackingParams.forEach(function(p) { if (u.searchParams.has(p)) { u.searchParams.delete(p); changed = true; } }); return changed ? u.toString() : url; } catch (e) { return url; } } function cleanLinks() { document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) { var clean = cleanUrl(a.href); if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean; }); } cleanLinks(); var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { mutations.forEach(function(m) { m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) { if (node.nodeType === 1) { if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks(); node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) { var clean = cleanUrl(a.href); if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean; }); } }); }); }); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + ' Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API · Issue #1793 · w3c/ServiceWorker · GitHub
                  Skip to content

                  Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

                  Description

                  @yoshisatoyanagisawa

                  The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

                  For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

                  To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

                  1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
                  const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
                  console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
                  console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
                  
                  1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
                  // Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
                  const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
                  'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
                  if (areConditionsSupported) {
                  // All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
                  await event.addRoutes({
                  condition: { or: [
                  { requestMethod: "GET" },
                  ]
                  },
                  source: "network"
                  });
                  } else {
                  // A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
                  console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
                  }
                  
                  1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
                  await event.addRoutes([{
                  condition: {
                  or: [
                  { requestMethod: "GET" }
                  ]
                  },
                  source: "network"
                  // This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
                  requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
                  }]);
                  

                  This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

                  Metadata

                  Metadata

                  Assignees

                  No one assigned

                    Labels

                    TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

                    Type

                    No type

                    Projects

                    No projects

                      Milestone

                      No milestone

                      Relationships

                      None yet

                      Development

                      No branches or pull requests

                      Issue actions

                      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube (function() { function tryTheater() { var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]'); if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) { btn.click(); } } // Try immediately tryTheater(); // Try after navigation (SPA) var lastUrl = location.href; setInterval(function() { if (location.href !== lastUrl) { lastUrl = location.href; setTimeout(tryTheater, 500); } }, 1000); // Also try on player load var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + ' Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API · Issue #1793 · w3c/ServiceWorker · GitHub
                      Skip to content

                      Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

                      Description

                      @yoshisatoyanagisawa

                      The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

                      For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

                      To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

                      1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
                      const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
                      console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
                      console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
                      
                      1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
                      // Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
                      const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
                      'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
                      if (areConditionsSupported) {
                      // All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
                      await event.addRoutes({
                      condition: { or: [
                      { requestMethod: "GET" },
                      ]
                      },
                      source: "network"
                      });
                      } else {
                      // A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
                      console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
                      }
                      
                      1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
                      await event.addRoutes([{
                      condition: {
                      or: [
                      { requestMethod: "GET" }
                      ]
                      },
                      source: "network"
                      // This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
                      requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
                      }]);
                      

                      This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

                      Metadata

                      Metadata

                      Assignees

                      No one assigned

                        Labels

                        TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

                        Type

                        No type

                        Projects

                        No projects

                          Milestone

                          No milestone

                          Relationships

                          None yet

                          Development

                          No branches or pull requests

                          Issue actions

                          , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content (function() { function unstick() { document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) { if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') { el.style.position = 'static'; el.style.top = 'auto'; el.style.zIndex = 'auto'; } }); } unstick(); var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + ' Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API · Issue #1793 · w3c/ServiceWorker · GitHub
                          Skip to content

                          Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

                          Description

                          @yoshisatoyanagisawa

                          The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

                          For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

                          To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

                          1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
                          const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
                          console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
                          console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
                          
                          1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
                          // Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
                          const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
                          'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
                          if (areConditionsSupported) {
                          // All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
                          await event.addRoutes({
                          condition: { or: [
                          { requestMethod: "GET" },
                          ]
                          },
                          source: "network"
                          });
                          } else {
                          // A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
                          console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
                          }
                          
                          1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
                          await event.addRoutes([{
                          condition: {
                          or: [
                          { requestMethod: "GET" }
                          ]
                          },
                          source: "network"
                          // This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
                          requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
                          }]);
                          

                          This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

                          Metadata

                          Metadata

                          Assignees

                          No one assigned

                            Labels

                            TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

                            Type

                            No type

                            Projects

                            No projects

                              Milestone

                              No milestone

                              Relationships

                              None yet

                              Development

                              No branches or pull requests

                              Issue actions

                              , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Universal Dark Mode - works on any site (function() { var enabled = true; function applyDarkMode() { if (!enabled) return; // Create style element if it doesn't exist var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style'); if (!style) { style = document.createElement('style'); style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style'; document.head.appendChild(style); } // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video style.textContent = ' /* Invert everything except media */ html { filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important; background: #1a1a2e !important; } /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */ img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] { filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important; } /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */ .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *, [data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"], .ace_editor, .ace_editor *, .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *, .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *, .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *, .highlight, .highlight *, pre code, pre code * { filter: none !important; } /* Fix common UI elements */ .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover { filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important; background: #2d2d44 !important; border-color: #444 !important; } /* Scrollbars */ ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; } ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; } ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; } /* Selection */ ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; } ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; } '; } function removeDarkMode() { var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style'); if (style) style.remove(); } // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) { if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') { e.preventDefault(); enabled = !enabled; if (enabled) { applyDarkMode(); console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled'); } else { removeDarkMode(); console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled'); } } }); // Apply on load applyDarkMode(); // Re-apply on dynamic content var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) { applyDarkMode(); } }); observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true }); console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle'); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })(); Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API · Issue #1793 · w3c/ServiceWorker · GitHub
                              Skip to content

                              Need for a mechanism to detect supported conditions and sources in the SW Static Routing API #1793

                              Description

                              @yoshisatoyanagisawa

                              The Service Worker Static Routing API defines routing rules using a dictionary. This design presents a potential issue for developers. If a rule includes a condition that the user agent does not recognize or support, it may be silently ignored rather than causing a syntax error. This could lead to the rule being applied in unintended situations, creating unpredictable behavior that is difficult to debug.

                              For example, if a developer includes a new or experimental condition in a rule, the rule might be partially applied on browsers that don't support that specific condition, effectively ignoring a critical piece of the intended logic. This behavior makes feature detection and graceful degradation difficult to implement reliably.

                              To address this, I propose the introduction of a mechanism to allow developers to verify which conditions and sources are supported by the user agent. This could be achieved in a few ways:

                              1. An API to Enumerate Supported Features: Introduce a method that returns a list of supported condition and source values. For example:
                              const capabilities = await event.getStaticRoutingCapabilities();
                              console.log(capabilities.supportedConditions); // ['urlPattern', 'requestMode', ...]
                              console.log(capabilities.supportedSources); // ['fetch', 'cache', ...]
                              
                              1. An API to Validate a Rule: Provide a method that allows developers to check if a set of conditions or sources is supported before adding the rule. This would enable proactive validation.
                              // Returns true if all specified condition keys are supported by the UA.
                              const areConditionsSupported = await event.supportsConditions([
                              'requestMethod', 'or', ]);
                              if (areConditionsSupported) {
                              // All conditions are supported, so we can safely add the rule.
                              await event.addRoutes({
                              condition: { or: [
                              { requestMethod: "GET" },
                              ]
                              },
                              source: "network"
                              });
                              } else {
                              // A condition is not supported. Use fallback logic.
                              console.log('A required routing condition is not supported. Using a simpler rule.');
                              }
                              
                              1. A "Required" or "Mandatory" Field in addRoutes(): Add an option to specify that certain conditions are essential for a rule. If a mandatory condition is not supported by the user agent, the addRoutes() call would reject, rather than silently ignoring the condition.
                              await event.addRoutes([{
                              condition: {
                              or: [
                              { requestMethod: "GET" }
                              ]
                              },
                              source: "network"
                              // This would cause the call to fail if `requestMethod` is not supported.
                              requiredConditions: ["requestMethod"]
                              }]);
                              

                              This topic has been previously discussed in WICG/service-worker-static-routing-api#28.

                              Metadata

                              Metadata

                              Assignees

                              No one assigned

                                Labels

                                TPAC2025Topics for discussion at TPAC 2025

                                Type

                                No type

                                Projects

                                No projects

                                  Milestone

                                  No milestone

                                  Relationships

                                  None yet

                                  Development

                                  No branches or pull requests

                                  Issue actions