[vocaro]

Originally Posted by Forrest

XHTML for one.

XHTML is identical to HTML; it just has stricter semantics.

Originally Posted by Forrest

Pages can also be completely comprised of JavaScript too, though that should be avoided.

No, you can't have a web page that's pure JavaScript. If I understand you correctly, you're talking about a case where JavaScript code generates the entire body of an HTML file programmatically. But in this case, you still need an HTML file to encapsulate the JavaScript. So it's still a standard HTML file, not some special JavaScript-only format.

Originally Posted by Forrest

Flash is another one. If it's saved just as the swf, it can be missing linked files which is one of the advantages of a webarchive.

SWF files are just SWF files. They might have hyperlinks in them, but they're still self-contained. There's no point in saving them as a WebArchive.

Now, if an HTML file happens to have an SWF embedded in it, then yes, that's the advantage of WebArchives: to keep media files together with their HTML containers. But that's the opposite of the case above. And it's still an HTML file.

Originally Posted by Forrest

SMIL is another than can be, though typically requires a plugin and that should really be embedded in HTML, but isn't always.

If a media file (SMIL, QuickTime, SVG, whatever) is embedded within an HTML file, then it's still an HTML file. In that case, yes, it should be saved as a WebArchive, since that's why WebArchive was invented: to put an HTML and its linked media files into one package. But if you're viewing any of these media files by themselves, then there's no reason to put them into a WebArchive file.

[Forrest]

vocaro, I have been trying to help you refine what it is you're asking. For each of the above examples I cited, I thought of a specific instance where each of them would have been applicable as a webarchive. At this point, you clearly don't know what you're talking about. Some of the statements you've made are just plain false. I was trying to help, but I'm not going to argue with you about this stuff.

[Len Case]

There are swf files that are not self-contained. There can be .mov files that are not self-contained. Arbitrary plugins can fetch arbitrary files--it's part of the plugin API. The webarchive mechanism allows us to save any files that were used in the display of the current content so if we have fetched multiple files, we prefer saving as a webarchive.

The underlying problem here is that the attempted fetch of the favicon is being added as a subresource of the text page--the fetch fails, but the server included alternate content which is added as a subresource. To see this yourself, open up the page info (Command-I).

What we need to do is either prevent the favicon from being considered a resource of the current page, or to exclude it when it is the only subresource.