I only looked at the tower transcript. If they were cleared for the FMS Visual, in some ways that deepens the mystery.
I listened to the recording, they specifically asked for FMS Bridge vsual 28R, and were cleared to land.
Interesting, when you listen (to the recording in post #4 of this thread) you hear different requests coming in.
at 1430 you have a delta request 28R visual;
at 1705 someone requests FMS 28R, bridge visual;
at 1942, a delta asks for RNAV bridge visual 28R;
at 2110, you have air canada 759 request FMS bridge visual 28R.
Interestingly, the "FMS Bridge Visual Rwy 28R" has an IFR missed approach procedure, which is contrary to the usual FAA policy for visual approaches.
True for the US on public procedures, but as a tailored approach, it makes sense to have that in the design? That may be another reason that this is a special, because you would have to include VFR and IFR waypoints in both of the databases.
TLV and BOD have published missed approaches on their RNAV visuals.