Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update interface for install event in summary table #1706

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 22, 2024

Conversation

tidoust
Copy link
Member

@tidoust tidoust commented Feb 22, 2024

Following #1701, the install event now uses the InstallEvent interface.

(FWIW, I noticed that because our spec crawler parses that table to map events with interfaces and make sure that everything's consistent)

I note that the spec also says in section 4.4:

Service workers have two lifecycle events, install and activate. Service workers use the ExtendableEvent interface for activate event and install event.

That's not completely wrong since InstallEvent inherits from ExtendableEvent, but maybe worth updating as well? The whole paragraph could perhaps be dropped since it does not really add new information: lifecycle events are already defined elsewhere, and the interface used is defined in algorithms (and summarized in the events table).


Preview | Diff

Following w3c#1701, the `install` event now uses the `InstallEvent` interface.
tidoust added a commit to w3c/webref that referenced this pull request Feb 22, 2024
Pending w3c/ServiceWorker#1706. Our consistency tests
fail otherwise because it cannot link the new `InstallEvent` interface to any
event.
tidoust added a commit to w3c/webref that referenced this pull request Feb 22, 2024
Pending w3c/ServiceWorker#1706. Our consistency tests
fail otherwise because it cannot link the new `InstallEvent` interface to any
event.
Copy link
Collaborator

@mkruisselbrink mkruisselbrink left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the fix. Yeah, the other paragraph could probably use some cleanup/removal as well although as you say it's not entirely wrong...

@mkruisselbrink mkruisselbrink merged commit 613f5a2 into w3c:main Feb 22, 2024
2 checks passed
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 22, 2024
SHA: 613f5a2
Reason: push, by mkruisselbrink

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
github-actions bot added a commit to asleekgeek/ServiceWorker that referenced this pull request Feb 23, 2024
SHA: 613f5a2
Reason: push, by pull[bot]

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants