I have used httrack on several occasions to make backup copies of a site before
editing it.  It worked flawlessly on almost every occasion, even to the point
of "copying" the errors I made in the changes :)  I am not a web designer by
any means and after looking at the html's produced by httrack and comparing
them to the "original" I began to wonder why bother with the "original" at
all?Since the "mirror" seems to be in every way indistinguishable from the
original.  We own the site so it isn't a "copy issue" but being ignorant of
the facts, I just wondered if there was a good reason to not simply use the
compiled html’s (which take a lot less space" and edit them as needed rather
than work with the huge (and mostly bloated) original files.  Is there
something I am missing?  The website is extremely simple and no more than 8 or
9 pages.