How would ideal routing tables work?

routing.hs

module MyServer.Routes (route) where
import FictitiousRoutingLib

-- Can't decide if I'd rather embed this into do-notation or just use lists; seems like the type param
-- ends up being a phantom type in the end?
route :: HttpRouter x
route = do 
    -- one thing you always want is static serving of files:
    dom "static.myapp.example.com" % staticServe "/var/www/staticAssets"
    -- maybe also `(excludePatterns [] $ staticServe "...")` to specify "these things shall never be served from that dir."
    -- so `staticServe :: FilePath -> RoutingAction ()` or so, with `dom :: Text -> RoutingFilter`,
    -- and I suppose then (%) :: RoutingFilter -> RoutingAction x -> HttpRouter x.
    -- possibly `type RoutingAction = HttpRouter`? All I care about from the calling library is:
    --     doRouting :: HttpRequest -> HttpRouter x -> Maybe (RoutingAction x)
    -- suggesting that `newtype HttpRouter x = Route (HttpRequest -> Maybe (RoutingAction x))` 
    -- Then since the above didn't match, we fall through to the next 
    dom "myapp.example.com" % do
        seg "wiki" % do