[Info-vax] Expected ratio of ServiceWorker instances to Geolocation Updates

[Richard Maher]

For some time I've been arguing with W3C/IETF (and anyone else who'd 
engage) that ServiceWorkers are the ideal platform to host the 
Background Geolocation functionality that Ultimate Web Apps need in 
order to compete on a level playing field with Native Apps. The sticking 
point is usually the fleeting nature of a ServiceWorkers' lifespan. I 
have always argued that it would be madness to kill them immediately and 
most implementations seem to agree. (Firefox being the most aggressive 
at 30secs see Bug at 
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1378587 this behaviour 
prevails even with heaps of CPU/Memory)

Anyway, in order to prove that I am right, and the likes of Jake 
Archibald are very much mistaken, I wrote a little Web App, Source code 
can be found here: 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Rmd3Rn8_hDNW1zSWRoXzBTclU (There is 
a aaa_readme.txt)

Now it still needs a bit of work to provide a trip summary page and map 
the trip on Google maps but I think you'll get the idea and most 
importantly see the real world, actual, demonstrable relationship 
between Service Worker Instances and Geolocation updates? (I wanted to 
get it out before the Europeans disappeared for August :-)

So have I done something stupid here? Am I imagining that I only get a 
new Service worker instance when I'm stuck at the lights for an extended 
period on the way home and position updates are nowhere to be seen? Are 
my coding skills lamentable and testing skills non-existent?

If not, then I have no idea why Web Apps are not allowed to satisfy 
these legitimate and very desirable user requirements. Sure, we'll get 
user-empowerment, permissions, and discovery right but let's get on with 
it? The TravelManagerPolyfill.js file is nearly all UA developers have 
to do!

Q: Have I understood the ServiceWorker architecture correctly and 
implemented a valid heuristic interrogation of ServiceWorker 
instantiation over time?