Unfortunately, there is not much we can do about transfer-encoding, but the data is otherwise exactly as is returned from the browser. Browsertrix uses the browser to create web archives, so users get an accurate representation of what they see in their browser, which is generally what people want from archives.

We do the best we can with a limited standard that is difficult to modify. Archiving is always lossy, we try to reduce that as much as possible, but there are limits. People create web archives because they care about not losing their stuff online, not because they need an accurate record of transfer-encoding property in an HTTP connection. If storing the transfer-encoding is the most important thing, then yes, there are better tools for that.

You could use a proxy.

"Archiving is always lossy" No.

Every archiving tool out there makes trade-offs about what is archived and how. No one preserves the raw TLS encrypted H3 traffic because that's not useful. When you browse through an archiving MITM proxy, there are different trade-offs: there's an extra HTTP connection involved (that's not stored), a fake MITM cert, and a downgrade of H2/H3 connection to HTTP/1 (some sites serve different content via H2 vs HTTP/1.1, can detect differences, etc...)

The web is best-effort, and so is archiving the web.

You're talking to the guy who built the best proxy recorder in the archiving industry ;) ikreymer created https://pywb.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

I think he has more context than any of us on the limits of proxy archiving vs browser based archiving.

But also if you really need perfect packet-level replication, just wireshark it as he said. Why bother with WARCs at all?

pywb has WARC issues too, due to use of warcio:

https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/The_WARC_Ecosystem