Difference/Advantages of Clutterfree Webarchive vs. Markdown

What are the differences and/or (dis)advantages of clutterfree webarchives vs. clutterfree markdown when I want to clip a webpage to DTTG.

WebArchives can be refreshed. This doesn’t always work well with the clutter free option. But, it depends on the site you’re clipping. Try both approaches and you’ll see.

Hi korm, thanks for the reply.

Does that mean, if I need a permanent version of a webpage, the clutterfree markdown-version is the better option, because that doesn’t refresh (what is, what I want). So a markdown-version is more like a pdf of the webpage (which I could get through the print-dialog, but then links don’t work, in the markdown-version they do).

So, what I actually want to say/ask is: Is the clutterfree markdown-version the better substitue for (offline) archiving a text on a webpage as pdf?

Yes, personally I would prefer a markdown version.

Markdown only keeps links to multimedia files, then request them on demand. So if you really want OFFLINE viewable, PDF may be a better choice(although it cannot support gif/video etc.).

What do you mean? Don’t understand, what you mean with this exactly? Sorry.
The problem is, that, if you save a webpage in DTTG as pdf (which is only possible through the print dialog) then the links get lost.

@yee means the multimedia content is not embedded in the markdown so it’s not truly an offline archive for those particular pages.

That’s unfortunately part of the way Safari “prints” PDFs vom web pages and as we’re on iOS here there’s not much we can do from the outside here.