| avacar |
Your definition is overly simplistic. There is no need to consider hafted vs unhafted if anything that has a handle of any kind is hafted. By this definition, any melee weapons save the chain/spiked chain is a hafted weapon. If I attach throw some wood as a handle on a whip, is it hafted?
The understanding comes from what are traditionally referred to as medieval hafted weapons. This includes axes, maces, flails, and polearms, primarily. Put most simply, a club or staff also counts, but it's a fair bit nitpicky. These are really going to fall into wooden weapons, since a haft without anything on it is scarcely a hafted weapon.
Hafting refers to putting a tool (in military cases almost always either a weight or a blade) onto a long handle (haft) for purposes of force. While the dagger is the original hafted weapon, I would argue that advances in dagger technology have changed it from a hafted weapon to simply a miniature sword.
The haft is, in this case, a primary part of the weapon's design and effectiveness, whereas in the case of the sword and the medieval dagger (no longer a stone shoved into a stump), the handle is simply more comfortable than holding onto the blade's tang.
--------------------------------------------------------------
TL;DR: We use the hafted weapon definition preferred by historians and experts, rather than extending the definition of hafted. No historian out there is saying "hafted weapons" and talking about swords.