But it unfortunately does not include a column for named forward and named include.
However I think the test is right, in that a named dispatch doesn't change the target information returned by the path/mapping methods... but I assume it changes behaviour of isUserInRole etc.?
So the language "is not available" is kind of correct, but also misleading. The mapping for the target is not available, but the original mapping is still available.
So that language could be improved. Perhaps we should update that table from #309 with a complete picture of how all methods change under all dispatches and include that in the spec ?