[www] r708 - trunk/www.matroska.org/data/technical/guides/faq

Author: alexnoe
Date: 2004-09-20 22:08:52 +0400 (Mon, 20 Sep 2004)
New Revision: 708

Modified:
   trunk/www.matroska.org/data/technical/guides/faq/index.html.en
Log:
cannot, not can not  and more grammar/spelling...

Modified: trunk/www.matroska.org/data/technical/guides/faq/index.html.en
===================================================================
--- trunk/www.matroska.org/data/technical/guides/faq/index.html.en	2004-09-18 09:31:06 UTC (rev 707)
+++ trunk/www.matroska.org/data/technical/guides/faq/index.html.en	2004-09-20 18:08:52 UTC (rev 708)
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
       <p><strong>Q:</strong> Ok, now i know what a container is, but what exactly 
         are the advantages of matroska compared to good old AVI ?</p>
       <p><strong>A:</strong> The AVI container was originally introduced by Microsoft 
-        in the early 90s, and was designed as a very flexible a/V container format 
+        in the early 90s, and was designed as a very flexible A/V container format 
         for the video and audio compression formats of those days. It is necessary 
         to understand that AVI is only one ( but important ) part of a complete 
         multimedia framework called 'Video For Windows' ( VfW ), offering programmers 
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@
         to sell their operating systems to people, instead of multimedia solutions 
         as they are trying to do today with WMV, so they had to make their OS 
         attractive to other programmers ).<br/>
-        Very unfortunately this VfW framework can not support many of the more 
+        Very unfortunately this VfW framework cannot support many of the more 
         advanced features that modern audio and video compression formats will 
         offer, such as Variable Bitrate audio encoding ( VBR ), or Variable Framerate 
         video encoding ( VFR ). Although AVI was extended with an additional standard 
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@
         stream</p>
       <p><br/>
         <strong>Q:</strong> How can i create matroska files ?</p>
-      <p><strong>A:</strong> The most easiest way would be to 'transmux' an existing 
+      <p><strong>A:</strong> The easiest way would be to 'transmux' an existing 
         AVI or OGM file. This is a lossless process, all the audio and video data 
         in the source file will be read from it, and packed into a matroska file 
         in a spec compliant way, but basically stay unaltered to avoid any degradation 
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@
         file, set 'video' to 'direct stream copy', goto 'file' 'save as ...' and 
         select '.mkv' from the file type dropdown list and rename it. Of course, 
         this doesnt make much sense if you dont have any plans to add something 
-        to the file that AVI or OGM can not support, like adding another audio 
+        to the file that AVI or OGM cannot support, like adding another audio 
         track in an unsupported audio compression format.<br/>
         Mosu's <a href="http://www.bunkus.org/videotools/mkvtoolnix/">mkvmerger</a> 
         is a command line based matroska muxer that can be run on Windows ( via 
@@ -171,13 +171,13 @@
       </p>
       <p> <strong>Q:</strong> What makes Matroska better (worse?) than an ogg 
         media container (.ogm)?</p>
-      <p><strong>A:</strong> Its less a matter of better/worse, and more a matter 
+      <p><strong>A:</strong> It's less a matter of better/worse, and more a matter 
         of different. This is a little complex and is broken up into a few sections. 
         First Ogg is not the same thing as Ogm.<br/>
-        <strong>Ogg</strong> was designed to stream audio, specificaly Vorbis. 
+        <strong>Ogg</strong> was designed to stream audio, specifically Vorbis. 
         Ogg was not designed to handle video, or any other type of audio. (Though 
-        their use is not prevented in the Ogg specs, it is also not specifically 
-        supported) Ogg is an RFC spec now, and is very useful for what it was 
+        their use is not prevented in the Ogg specs, it is not specifically 
+        supported either) Ogg is an RFC spec now, and is very useful for what it was 
         designed for, streaming Vorbis. There were never any Ogg or Vorbis DirectShow 
         filters released by Xiph, which is a huge shame.<br/>
         <strong>Ogm</strong> is an implementation of placing other 'things' in 
@@ -185,8 +185,8 @@
         Tobias more or less joined the Xiph team through a series of events that 
         I will not repeat. There are no official specs. The sources will be released 
         as open source, but they have been scheduled to do so for almost six months. 
-        If Xiph does decide to use part of OGM, they will likely change to specs 
-        some. They have already said that they intend to maintain support of old 
+        If Xiph does decide to use part of OGM, they are likely to change the specs 
+        to some extent. They have already said that they intend to maintain support of old 
         OGM files in their new filters (whenever those are released).<br/>
         So, we have:<br/>
         <strong>Ogg</strong><br/>
@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@
         5. Initial design is to support presentation container features such as 
         Chapters, Tags, AudioGain, Menus, etc.<br/>
         Will Matroska be streamable? Yes, but low bitrate streaming like streaming 
-        Vorbis, will always be better in Ogg. This is because their designs are 
+        Vorbis, will always be better in Ogg. This is because their design is 
         for different purposes.</p>
 </div>
 </div>