Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

thekevan

I was just going to ask why this was better than just saving an MHTML file in the browser.

View on HN

It seems that Firefox doesn't support saving a page as MHTML yet.

Maybe that's the reason.

https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/add-support-of-mhtml-fo...

Also it doesn’t quite fully save all of the assets, like fonts if it were referenced in CSS files

Because the MHTML format produced by Chromium can almost be considered as proprietary.

That's not correct. MHTML has been defined as internet standard since 1999. MHTML has been an internet standard since 1999, with support dating back to IE 5.0.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2557

I'm actually referring to the "set of modifications" described here [1] and the fact that only Chromium can open (these) MHTML files today.

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FvmYUC0S0BkdkR7wZsg0hLdK...

Good to know that!

Are you meaning that these modifications cause the generated MHTML files to become non-standards-compliant?

I wouldn't consider them proprietary though. At least the primary software used to open these files, Chromium, is open-source software.

I agree that it's debatable, which is why I used the word “almost” ;). The fact remains that this info isn't in RFCs and is hard to find on the web.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com