Re: [css-d] media queries following prior rules

[Peter H.]

> On 11 Jul 2016, at 18:13, John J  wrote:
> 
> At the link below, the name, email, subject fields don't appear to be
> obeying rules governing width as in the previous media breaks..
> 
> at 360 and 320, those fields exceed the width of  their parent, rather than
> respecting padding set prior..maybe I'm missing something..if I have my
> rules set up correctly, the css should behave a certain way until told
> differently in the next media query, right?
> 
> Thank you for any insight about this!
> 
> John


John, I think it's your box-sizing rule. For some reason it's specified as 
'inherit' in the reset. If you change that to 'border-box' your layout may work 
as intended.  Peter
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] 508 compliance

[Peter H.]

Hi Karl, I'm not sure what you mean by 'hard coded or inline'. 

Make a test page and place an image:



The image will fill 100% of its container's width. It makes no difference if 
the css is inline, in the head or in an external sheet.

Best regards, Peter


-
> On 14 Apr 2016, at 23:03, Karl DeSaulniers  wrote:
> 
> I don't believe this is correct. Widths and heights hard coded or inline 
> trump external.
> Unless I missed something along the way. (:  ))
> 
> Best,
> Karl DeSaulniers
> 
> 
> 
>> On Apr 14, 2016, at 2:24 PM, "Peter H."  wrote:
>> 
>> If you specify any img width in the css then the html widths will have no 
>> effect.

__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] 508 compliance

[Peter H.]

If you specify any img width in the css then the html widths will have no 
effect. But beware that if you haven't specified any heights, then the html 
'height' may cause havoc with your layout. In the css, even  height:auto;  is 
sufficient to overide the html.

Maybe 508 compliance requires image dimensions, I don't know, but if it doesn't 
then I don't see the point of adding width and height to the html.

Regards, Peter


-
> On 14 Apr 2016, at 21:04, Tom Livingston  wrote:
> 
> List,
> 
> Somewhat CSS related, I have a question about image dimensions. After 
> checking a 508 compliance check, one thing flagged was not having width and 
> height for images hard coded in the html. For responsive purposes,  I thought 
> it was best not to code your dimensions in the html and let css/responsive 
> images do their thing. Not so?
> 
> -- 
> 
> Tom Livingston | Senior Front End Developer | Media Logic |
> ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | medialogic.com
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] rendering of Open Sans on my project site vs. Typekit

[Peter H.]

> El 31/12/2014, a las 19:44, Debbie Campbell escribió:
> 
> Looking at the 700-weight (bold) Open Sans in the ul in this page (starting 
> with Drill Pad Construction), can you see how the lowercase a's have the 
> counter at the top filled in? I'm looking in Chrome, FF, IE11 on Windows 7:
> 
> http://www.oilfield-construction.com/NEW_SWD/
> 
> If I look at this example on Typekit though, in the same browsers, the 
> lowercase a counters never close up:
> 
> https://typekit.com/fonts/open-sans
> 
> I though it might be something in my normalize.css but disabling it doesn't 
> change the appearance of the a's. Can someone point out what's wrong in my 
> site? If screenshots would help please let me know.


I don't see any difference with page at default 100% or zoomed to maximum, and 
the lowercase 'a' looks fine and correct.

Mac 10.6.8, FF v34.0.8 and iPad with retina, iOS 7.1.2

Perhaps it's an OS or graphics rendering thang rather than a problem with your 
code.

Peter H.
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] Fwd: Grids: what's all the fuss ?

[Peter H.]

De: Tim Dawson 
Fecha: 11 de agosto de 2014 12:25:24 GMT+02:00
Para: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Asunto: Re: [css-d] Grids: what's all the fuss ?

On 11/08/2014 09:43, MiB wrote:
> 11 aug 2014 kl. 10:02 skrev Tim Dawson :
>> what I'd do with an eight or twelve column design (or why I'd need it, 
>> really).
> 
> One word: Flexibility with contained order.
But I think I can already do that with floated , which are even more 
flexible since they
can be any % of the container width (must add to 100%, of course). 'Contained 
order' suggests a
bit more, but only that things should line up vertically and not be all over 
the place ? (with which I'd agree).

So I'd have (say) a 60% div and a 40% div (58.33% and 41.67% if I must be in 
twelfths). I can't see why I need an 8.33% div. In short, I'm still missing the 
point.
> 
> The best design book for grids IMHO is "Ordering Disorder: Grid Principles 
> for Web Design” by
> Khoi Vinh (2010 Voices That Matter). It’s totally wonderful and in my opinion 
> contains
> timeless principles. Better than any article on the subject.
Thanks for the reference. Mixed reviews on Amazon, but I respect books from 
'Voices that Matter' (and already have several).

Regards,

Tim Dawson
> 
> __ 
> css-discuss
> [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 
> http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ
> -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- 
> http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
> Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
> 


Grids give your site a visual consistency, which in my book is a good thing.

12-column grids are handy if you don't know the final design - they're very 
flexible in that you can use as a base for 2-, 3-, 4-, or 6- column pages. 
Usually they're used for templates where the creator of the grid cannot know 
the final layout use.

But if you do know the page layout then it doesn't seem worth the complication 
of basing it on a 12-column grid - you can simply, as you say, create the grid 
you need directly.

Peter


__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Do modern mobile browsers deliberately ignore font size?

[Peter H.]

On a Motorola G phone with Android Kitkat the  text is quite large and the 
 text is tiny.

On an iPhone 4 all the text is the same size, and tiny.

Peter



El 13/03/2014, a las 23:31, Ezequiel Garzón escribió:

Thanks again for your reply. Now I'm really beginning to second-guess
myself! And here I was so convinced it had something to do with the
font boosting and inflation John Mellor refers to here [1]. I will ask
tomorrow a couple of friends to let me use their cell phones... I'm
beginning to fear this is a bug specific to my Galaxy Note II...

Thanks once more, and goodnight from Spain.

__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Will the unsemantic HTML elements B and I be soon phased out?

[Peter H.]

> El 17/02/2014, a las 11:29, Barney Carroll escribió:
> 
> While bikeshedding around 'how semantic' people feel any given element to be 
> is a great laugh (although definitely off-topic for this list), I would 
> highly recommend the HTML specification for insight into the purpose of any 
> HTML element, especially when confusion arises over the possibility of using 
> other elements in its stead. The 'Text-level semantics' page would seem to be 
> incredibly pertinent to this conversation. From the section describing the 
>  element:
> 
> The em element isn't a generic "italics" element. Sometimes, text is intended 
> to stand out from the rest of the paragraph, as if it was in a different mood 
> or voice. For this, the i element is more appropriate.
> The em element also isn't intended to convey importance; for that purpose, 
> the strong element is more appropriate.


Thanks Barney, that's a useful extract.  Because browsers draw  as italic 
I'd always assumed it was just a new fangled complication. But it seems as 
though it wouldn't be bad practice at all to restyle em in the css as one 
thinks appropriate to the concept of emphasis.

I had to go to wikipedia for 'bikeshedding'. Must be my age.

Peter
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Will the unsemantic HTML elements B and I be soon phased out?

[Peter H.]

> El 17/02/2014, a las 11:01, Philip Taylor escribió:
> 
> Peter H. wrote:
>> I've always had a problem understanding why  and  are
>> supposedly more semantic than  and .
> 
> Because  means "emphasised" and  means "strongly emphasised" 
> (semantic, saying nothing about how they will be rendered) whilst  means 
> "set in italics" and  means "set in bold" (presentational, focussing 
> solely on presentation and saying nothing whatsoever about semantics).  There 
> is nothing "supposedly" about it; the older tags addressed presentation, the 
> more modern ones address semantics.
> 
> Philip Taylor

What you say is evidently true, but my point is that there are many cases where 
you want to distinguish words within a text without necessarily implying 
emphasis.

It's also true that the browser by default draws an italic font for 'emphasis' 
and a bold font for 'strong' so the result is equally presentational. Dunno why 
they couldn't have left it well alone, stuck with 'i' and 'b' and not created 
another can of worms.

Peter
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Will the unsemantic HTML elements B and I be soon phased out?

[Peter H.]

I've always had a problem understanding why  and  are supposedly 
more semantic than  and . Italics don't necessarily indicate emphasis and 
bold doesn't necessarily indicate importance. Often they're nods to traditional 
comprehension of things or to the organisation of a text so as to aid 
understanding.

In fact, if you ask me, the instinctive, natural distinction between 'emphasis' 
and 'strong' is fuzzy, despite html5's attempt to define it. 

On the other hand, if  plainly means 'italic', and results in an italic font 
being displayed, then that to me is straightforward and unambiguous and no 
messing about. When I read it I can understand it however I prefer and 
according to the context. Same goes for 'bold'.

Of course if you style  in the css to produce a different, non-italic style 
then, yes, that's very unsemantic.

But seeing as  and  will be legit for the foreseeable future I'll prefer 
them over  and . They're quicker to key, too.

Peter H. 
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] html email with css

[Peter H.]

On Sep 5, 2013, at 10:09 PM, vi...@graymatterstudios.ca wrote:

> Hi. I have been lurking in this forum for a few years and have learned quite 
> a bit from reading the posts. Now I have a question to ask. 
> 
> I am coding an html eBlast and have most of the CSS as inline but I also have 
> quite a bit of css in the head. It seems MailChimp strips out the css in the 
> head. Does anyone know how to get around this?
> 
> Thank you in advance. 
> 
> Vince Mendella

Vince, everything one reads on the 'net about html emails says use only inline 
css and tables, and even then there are many css styles to be avoided, 
especially floats. You can't always rely on inheritance either, so you have to 
repeat some styles with every occurence of a tag.

I use tables for structure and inline css for basic styling and have had no 
disasters with hotmail, google, yahoo or email programmes like outlook and mail.

Peter H.
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] css-based flyout menu for mobile?

[Peter H.]

> El 15/06/2013, a las 01:20, COM escribió:
> 
> Can anyone point me to a 100% css-based flyout menu for use with mobile 
> devices? By flyout, I mean that when User presses a Menu icon, the menu 
> slides out or otherwise appears, User presses their choice and menu hides, 
> chosen page loads.
> 
> John

It's quite old now but Son of Suckerfish does the things on your list. It has a 
bit of javascript to deal with "hover:" on old IE's, but if you're not worried 
about that you can dispense with the script.

You'll find it at:
http://www.htmldog.com/articles/suckerfish/

regards, Peter
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Simple Floats on Multiple Rows Getting "Stuck"

[Peter H.]

> El 30/05/2013, a las 21:02, Christopher Akins escribió:
> 
> . . .
> 
> I have several floated  items that look fine until the page is made
> narrower.  Then I want the floats to fall nicely to the next line and slide
> all the way to the left, but they get "stuck" and won't slide all the way
> over to the left until the page is pulled way in to be at it's minimum
> width.
> 
> . . .
> 
> Christopher Akins


Hi Christopher, try using display:inline-block. I first saw this solution in a 
post on this list by Georg a while ago, and it's ideal for lining up floated 
items of variable height regardless of window width:

display: inline-block;
vertical-align: top;

I notice that the link that Georg posted is still functioning so I'll take the 
liberty of repeating it here:

http://www.gunlaug.com/contents/test/test-floating-boxes-mc0.html

Hope this is useful, Peter H.


__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Floating boxes with variable heights

[Peter H.]

thanks Georg, that's very handy. Peter


> -
> El 27/07/2012, a las 17:27, Georg escribió:
> 
> an alternative to equal height floats, and inline-block are very often the 
> best 
> 
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Floating boxes with variable heights

[Peter H.]

Georg, I'm intrigued by your example and have wanted that behaviour several 
times in the past and couldn't figure a way to achieve it without fixed height 
divs.

But from your test page there's a bit of css that I don't understand:

.floating {
float-:left;
width:140px;
margin:1em .5em 0 0;
border:1px dashed #ccc;
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: top;
}

In your float declaration, if one removes the hyphen after the word 'float' the 
page ceases to behave in the desired way. 

On the other hand, if 'float-' is a mistype (and doesn't exist as a 
declaration) then there is no float declaration and the whole thing depends on 
display: inline-block;

Is that right?

I wonder how far back inline-block is supported. When you say 'obsolete 
browsers', are you referring to IE6 and IE7?

Peter



> El 27/07/2012, a las 01:43, Georg escribió:
> 
> ...an if you don't bother to test this old float-alternative at your end, 
> here are a few examples.
> 
> http://www.gunlaug.com/contents/test/test-floating-boxes.html
> http://www.gunlaug.com/contents/test/test-floating-boxes-c.html
> http://www.gunlaug.com/contents/test/test-floating-boxes-r.html
> 
> I can't be bothered to debug obsolete browsers, so others will have to 
> include the old fixes for those - if they like.
> 
> regards
>Georg
> 

__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] ie 6/7/8

[Peter H.]

> El 23/04/2012, a las 17:13, David Laakso escribió:
> 
> Your comments and suggestion on this site  in
> Internet Explorer 6/7/8 are appreciated.
> 

David, an oldish Acer portable running XP, browser windows at full width of the 
screen:
in IE6 & 7 the page draws very vertically, as though it was intended for a 
mobile and hasn't responded to wider screen and doesn't fill the width of the 
screen. 
The main menu is under the 'Wild Thing' image (one might not bother to go down 
enough to find it) and the vertical 'About' appears last at the very bottom. 
The Wild Thing image is scaled up I think and looks horrible, the text next to 
it is pixely and nasty and barely readable. The cream circle is on the right of 
your headings

IE8 draws the page possibly the way you intended.

Another thing: only in IE6 the main menu items show rules above AND below 
(darkening on hover), whereas IE7 & 8 shows rules only on hover and only below 
each item. Scrolling behaviour is also not how it should be in IE6.

Wouldn't Adobe Browserlab be a good quick way to check your changes?
https://browserlab.adobe.com/

Hope this is useful, Peter
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Finding fallback fonts (for Calibri)

[Peter H.]

> El 05/03/2012, a las 12:27, Jukka K. Korpela escribió:
> 
> 2012-03-05 13:08, Barney Carroll wrote:
> 
>> FWIW I recently discovered Open Sans, which has the same nice hinting,
>> relative lightness, and pleasant rounded glyphs as Calibri — but you
>> can embed everywhere with no legal repercussions:
>> http://www.google.com/webfonts/specimen/Open+Sans
> 
> Thanks, it looks interesting, but unless I'm missing something (as I use to 
> do), it resembles Arial as regards to the size of letters. It lacks the 
> certain crowdedness of Arial, and it might be very suitable for many 
> purposes, but it does not look like a good fallback for Calibri - it looks 
> considerably bigger than Calibri of the same size.
> It also lacks many commonly needed special characters, like arrows and the 
> minus sign.
> But maybe there's some other freely embeddable font that sufficiently 
> resembles Calibri?
> Yucca


Lucida Grande?  The design's not as nice as Calibri but the x-height is similar 
and would be fairly widely installed especially if you specify the windows 
variants in the family.

I found this page handy for describing the quirks of Lucida Sans and Lucida 
Sans Unicode on Windows:

http://www.brownbatterystudios.com/sixthings/2007/03/14/lucida-hybrid-the-grande-alternative/

Hope this is useful, Peter H.
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] desktop. tablet. mobile.

[Peter H.]

> El 31/01/2012, a las 03:31, David Laakso escribió:
> 
> First pass: 
> Constructive comments and suggestions are always appreciated.
> Thanks.
> 

designery comments: really like the feel of it, nice sparseness, tasty use of 
colour, intriguing, slightly enigmatic even. Great images. 

On the puzzling side, though, the desktop pages look more like mobile pages 
poorly adapted to big screen. The primary content is pushed too far down the 
window by less important stuff - gives a strange hierarchy to the links. If I 
was the client I wouldn't be happy having 'About' almost at the very end.

On the phone, there's too much scrolling down to do before arriving at the 
primary content.

I like the League Gothic but, as always, the letter spacing for the web font is 
clunky. Me, I'd use an image for the gallery logo so as to control the kerning 
and make it look nice.

On the desktop there's a double rule under Dakota which maybe isn't intended - 
the thin white rule being very slightly wider than the grey one.

Hope this is useful feedback, Peter
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Container shifts, one page to another

[Peter H.]

> El 25/10/2011, a las 00:11, John escribió:
> 
> http://coffeeonmars.com/testing/index.html
> http://coffeeonmars.com/testing/WPR_Wire.html
> 
> 
> When I load the two links above and go from one tab to the other, I see the 
> content area shift to the left (going from the index page to the wpr_wire 
> page)
> 
> the only browswer that doesn't do this is Win IE 6, but Win FF 7 does, Win 
> Opera 11.51 does , as do Mac Safari 5, FF 6 and Opera 11.50
> 
> can anyone see why this shift happens? my hunch is that it has to do with the 
> image on the second page, though I'm pretty sure its well within the bounds 
> of the area it's sitting in.
> 

Could it be just that the 2nd page draws a scroll bar, which causes everything 
to shift to the left ?

Hth, best regards, Peter H.
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Vertical centering? And another problem.

[Peter H.]

> El 12/08/2011, a las 14:27, Rory Bernstein escribió:
> 
> . . .  I need the left and right cols to vertically center inside the div 
> that has the red border on it. How? In other words, I want the white space 
> above & below the text (left) and photo (right) to be the same, not matter 
> how much text, or what size image, I put int there.
> 

in case this is of any help: the only way I've ever found to reliably centre 
vertically, is to use a good old-fashioned table. In this case, say, a single 
row with a cell each for your text and your image would probably do.

Best regards, Peter H.
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Browser Stacking Issues

[Peter H .]

1. In Chrome (Mac&  Win) and IE 7&  8, the css drop-downs on the  
left of
this page fall behind the flash MP3 player in the left column. Seems  
like

this would be a stacking issue but can't pin it down.

http://159.247.160.110/pod.php



A Flash movie will appear on top in some browsers, even if you've  
stacked your divs using z-index.


Normally I'd have suggested that in the object tags where the Flash  
resides, to try adding  wmode="opaque"  and see if that fixes the  
issue. It will also work using  wmode="transparent"  but I once read  
that "transparent" needs a lot more cpu power and that for z-index  
purposes only, "opaque" is better.


However, I see that your .swf is within javascript tags so I'm not  
sure whether the above is helpful, but it might at least give you a  
pointer.


HTH, Peter H.
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/