Talk:Matroska

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Matroska. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161011215209/http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mcf.devel/673 to http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mcf.devel/673

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:37, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Caron on the S

I made an edit recently noting that Matroska is stylized as Matroška (e.g. in the logo) but it was reverted because “a logo is a picture. A picture does not define a product name.” However, I clearly labeled the spelling with the caron as stylized. The logo does indeed define how the name is stylized.

VectorEyes (talk) 03:21, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

First of all, you not only labelled the spelling as stylized in your edit, you changed the official project name. Which is simply wrong. Secondly, the intro already includes an explanation about the stylized š in the logo in more detail and more accurately (it explicitly says it is stylized like this in the logo, which is important). Adding it to the first sentence was redundant, out of place and misleading.

Finally, a logo is, indeed, a picture, a graphical symbol. It does not define a product name, and does not define how to "stylize" a name in regular text. Product or company names and trademarked names may be indeed stylized in written text (that is, not in a logo) by the authors or trademark owners, but Wikipedia generally disregards that, too. As an example, see Nvidia, which is stylized as NVIDIA by the company in all written materials, even though the logo says nVIDIA. But a logo is just a picture, and does not define the company name, and does not even define the company name stylization in written text. And Wikipedia disregards even the written text stylization.—J. M. (talk) 03:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I was not aware that changing the title on the infobox also changed the official project name, and was indeed a mistake. I did not feel that the inclusion of the stylized spelling was out of place, misleading, or even redundant. Evidently, however, that was a lapse of judgment. I wish the guidelines were clearer on the matter and that the arbitration of style was more consistent. — VectorEyes (talk) 04:31, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

.mxf comparison?

in my ears and eyes .mkv and .mxf seem incredibly similar: would a comparison be of value to compose here?

at deeper search (i) see no other existant comparisons online. nor have any friends of mine knowledge about what .mxf would be in comparison to .mkv

open question, please do add to this line of pondering SmthSweet (talk) 23:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Notability tag

Please dont remove the tag without addressing the issues explained in the tags. This is against Wikipedia rules. Whether notable or not is decided by wikipedia policies. - Altenmann >talk 23:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)