Anne raises some questions about how service workers will interact with bfcache here: http://logs.glob.uno/?c=content#c322157 For example, 1) Should the service worker still see FetchEvents for documents when you go back when the document is in the bfcache? Might surprise devs. 2) Can a document in the bfcache keep the ServiceWorker from updating to a new version because its still controlling a document. And other such behavior. I think this is a bit corner casey and probably needs real-world dev input, so setting as v3.

(In reply to Ben Kelly [:bkelly] from comment #0) > 1) Should the service worker still see FetchEvents for documents when you go > back when the document is in the bfcache? Might surprise devs. I would say no, as there is no network request happening. > 2) Can a document in the bfcache keep the ServiceWorker from updating to a > new version because its still controlling a document. I believe so, since we have nothing to prevent that from happening AFAIK. But a page that cares about this can register a beforeunload handler and disable bf-cache. > I think this is a bit corner casey and probably needs real-world dev input, > so setting as v3. Well, issue #1 is not a bug. And I don't think we'd want to disable bf-cache for all controlled documents, so it's not clear to me if we'd want to fix #2 either, but at any rate, it's fine to punt on this for now.

We've discussed this at spec meetings before. I believe the answers are: > 1) Should the service worker still see FetchEvents for documents when you go > back when the document is in the bfcache? Might surprise devs. No. > 2) Can a document in the bfcache keep the ServiceWorker from updating to a > new version because its still controlling a document. No. We have discussed adding a "client controlled" event that the SW would see for a document coming out of bfcache, though.