This question already has answers here:
Make container shrink-to-fit child elements as they wrap
(4 answers)
CSS when inline-block elements line-break, parent wrapper does not fit new width
(2 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I have a table with some elements inside of the table header.
The th elements might have a specific width specified.
There is a wrapper element with display: inline-flex inside of the <th>.
One of the flex items inside it has text, which might be multiple words that could break.
If the width of the th is too small to accommodate the text, it will break nicely. However the width of the flex container will not shrink to fit the broken text nicely.
You can see it in action here: https://codepen.io/mydea/pen/ExaeWoX
Summary:
<th class="th" style="width: 230px;">
<div class='flex-container'>
<div class="first">
<img style="height: 40px; width: 40px;" src="..." />
</div>
<div class="second">multiple longer words</div>
</div>
</th>
.th {
text-align: right;
}
.flex-container {
display: inline-flex;
align-items: center;
text-align: right;
}
The first th shows the issue. The second th has a large enough width that it works as expected. And the last one is without any width specified, for reference.
So in this example here:
I'd like there to not be any unnecessary space between the left (green box) flex item and the right flex item with the text in it.
Is that possible? I played around with everything I could think of, but could never get the desired result that:
The flex items are vertically centered (align-items: center)
The flex items do not wrap to a new line
The overall container is right aligned
If the text breaks, there is no unnecessary space between the flex items
I am trying to vertically align elements within an ID wrapper. I gave the property display:inline-flex; to this ID as the ID wrapper is the flex container.
But there is no difference in presentation. I expected that everything in the wrapper ID would be displayed inline. Why isn't it?
#wrapper {
display: inline-flex;
/*no difference to display:flex; */
}
<body>
<div id="wrapper">
<header>header</header>
<nav>nav</nav>
<aside>aside</aside>
<main>main</main>
<footer>footer</footer>
</div>
</body>
display: inline-flex does not make flex items display inline. It makes the flex container display inline. That is the only difference between display: inline-flex and display: flex. A similar comparison can be made between display: inline-block and display: block, and pretty much any other display type that has an inline counterpart.1
There is absolutely no difference in the effect on flex items; flex layout is identical whether the flex container is block-level or inline-level. In particular, the flex items themselves always behave like block-level boxes (although they do have some properties of inline-blocks). You cannot display flex items inline; otherwise you don't actually have a flex layout.
It is not clear what exactly you mean by "vertically align" or why exactly you want to display the contents inline, but I suspect that flexbox is not the right tool for whatever you are trying to accomplish. Chances are what you're looking for is just plain old inline layout (display: inline and/or display: inline-block), for which flexbox is not a replacement; flexbox is not the universal layout solution that everyone claims it is (I'm stating this because the misconception is probably why you're considering flexbox in the first place).
1 The differences between block layout and inline layout are outside the scope of this question, but the one that stands out the most is auto width: block-level boxes stretch horizontally to fill their containing block, whereas inline-level boxes shrink to fit their contents. In fact, it is for this reason alone you will almost never use display: inline-flex unless you have a very good reason to display your flex container inline.
OK, I know at first might be a bit confusing, but display is talking about the parent element, so means when we say: display: flex;, it's about the element and when we say display:inline-flex;, is also making the element itself inline...
It's like make a div inline or block, run the snippet below and you can see how display flex breaks down to next line:
.inline-flex {
display: inline-flex;
}
.flex {
display: flex;
}
p {
color: red;
}
<body>
<p>Display Inline Flex</p>
<div class="inline-flex">
<header>header</header>
<nav>nav</nav>
<aside>aside</aside>
<main>main</main>
<footer>footer</footer>
</div>
<div class="inline-flex">
<header>header</header>
<nav>nav</nav>
<aside>aside</aside>
<main>main</main>
<footer>footer</footer>
</div>
<p>Display Flex</p>
<div class="flex">
<header>header</header>
<nav>nav</nav>
<aside>aside</aside>
<main>main</main>
<footer>footer</footer>
</div>
<div class="flex">
<header>header</header>
<nav>nav</nav>
<aside>aside</aside>
<main>main</main>
<footer>footer</footer>
</div>
</body>
Also quickly create the image below to show the difference at a glance:
flex and inline-flex both apply flex layout to children of the container. Container with display:flex behaves like a block-level element itself, while display:inline-flex makes the container behaves like an inline element.
Using two-value display syntax instead, for clarity
The display CSS property in fact sets two things at once: the outer display type, and the inner display type. The outer display type affects how the element (which acts as a container) is displayed in its context. The inner display type affects how the children of the element (or the children of the container) are laid out.
If you use the two-value display syntax, which is only supported in some browsers like Firefox, the difference between the two is much more obvious:
display: block is equivalent to display: block flow
display: inline is equivalent to display: inline flow
display: flex is equivalent to display: block flex
display: inline-flex is equivalent to display: inline flex
display: grid is equivalent to display: block grid
display: inline-grid is equivalent to display: inline grid
Outer display type: block or inline:
An element with the outer display type of block will take up the whole width available to it, like <div> does. An element with the outer display type of inline will only take up the width that it needs, with wrapping, like <span> does.
Inner display type: flow, flex or grid:
The inner display type flow is the default inner display type when flex or grid is not specified. It is the way of laying out children elements that we are used to in a <p> for instance. flex and grid are new ways of laying out children that each deserve their own post.
Conclusion:
The difference between display: flex and display: inline-flex is the outer display type, the first's outer display type is block, and the second's outer display type is inline. Both of them have the inner display type of flex.
References:
The two-value syntax of the CSS Display property on mozzilla.org
The Difference between "flex" and "inline-flex"
Short answer:
One is inline and the other basically responds like a block element(but has some of it's own differences).
Longer answer:
Inline-Flex - The inline version of flex allows the element, and it's children, to have flex properties while still remaining in the regular flow of the document/webpage. Basically, you can place two inline flex containers in the same row, if the widths were small enough, without any excess styling to allow them to exist in the same row. This is pretty similar to "inline-block."
Flex - The container and it's children have flex properties but the container reserves the row, as it is taken out of the normal flow of the document. It responds like a block element, in terms of document flow. Two flexbox containers could not exist on the same row without excess styling.
The problem you may be having
Due to the elements you listed in your example, though I am guessing, I think you want to use flex to display the elements listed in an even row-by-row fashion but continue to see the elements side-by-side.
The reason you are likely having issues is because flex and inline-flex have the default "flex-direction" property set to "row." This will display the children side-by side. Changing this property to "column" will allow your elements to stack and reserve space(width) equal to the width of its parent.
Below are some examples to show how flex vs inline-flex works and also a quick demo of how inline vs block elements work...
display: inline-flex; flex-direction: row;
Fiddle
display: flex; flex-direction: row;
Fiddle
display: inline-flex; flex-direction: column;
Fiddle
display: flex; flex-direction: column;
Fiddle
display: inline;
Fiddle
display: block
Fiddle
Also, a great reference doc:
A Complete Guide to Flexbox - css tricks
Display:flex apply flex layout to the flex items or children of the container only. So, the container itself stays a block level element and thus takes up the entire width of the screen.
This causes every flex container to move to a new line on the screen.
Display:inline-flex apply flex layout to the flex items or children as well as to the container itself. As a result the container behaves as an inline flex element just like the children do and thus takes up the width required by its items/children only and not the entire width of the screen.
This causes two or more flex containers one after another, displayed as inline-flex, align themselves side by side on the screen until the whole width of the screen is taken.
I'd like to add some details about screen reader behaviour, because there's some surprises here.
Some background first. Some screen readers like NVDA handle display: block and display: inline-block differently (and they should, as you will see later).
Comparison between different display attributes
display: block
A display: block element will always be announced in a separate "line", meaning NVDA will stop talking after its contents, and the user will manually tell NVDA to announce the next element (typically with Down arrow key).
<div>This is the first line</div>
<div>This is another line</div>
This will make NVDA announce This is the first line, and then This is another line.
The following yields the same result:
<span style="display: block">This is the first line</span>
<span style="display: block">This is another line</span>
display: inline-block
A display: inline-block element will be announced together with all preceding and following other inline elements (display: inline and display: inline-block).
<span style="display: inline-block">This is the first line</span>
<span style="display: inline-block">This is another line</span>
This will make the screen reader announce both elements in one go: This is the first line This is another line.
As said before, it doesn't matter whether it's an inline or inline-block element; the following yields the exact same result:
<span style="display: inline">This is the first line</span> <!-- Inline! -->
<span style="display: inline-block">This is another line</span> <!-- Inline block! -->
display: flex
This works exactly like display: block.
display: inline-flex
Surprisingly, this also works like display: block, not like display: inline-block!
display: grid / display: inline-grid
I didn't test this, but I expect the same like with flex / inline-flex here.
Why is that a problem?
Using display: inline-block, one can create elements that visually look very distinct, but semantically are treated "as one".
For example, consider the following headline in an online news platform:
<h2>
<span class="category">Rain forests</span>
They need our love
</h2>
You now want to visually style the category (Rain forests) very different to the "real" title ('They need our love'), i.e. by putting each in its own line, something like this:
If you'd make category a display: block element, then the screen reader would announce the heading in two separate lines like this: Rain forests, heading level 2, then They need our love, heading level 2. This is confusing to the user: are there two different headings on the page? Why is there no content for the first one (instead, immediately an apparent second heading seems to follow)?
If however you'd make category a display: inline-block element, then the screen reader would announce the heading in one go: Rain forests They need our love, heading level 2.
It is sad, that display: inline-flex (and probably inline-grid, too) does not mimic the behaviour. So if you want to offer perfect accessibility, you might want to use inline-block in such situations.
You can display flex items inline, providing your assumption is based on wanting flexible inline items in the 1st place. Using flex implies a flexible block level element.
The simplest approach is to use a flex container with its children set to a flex property. In terms of code this looks like this:
.parent{
display: inline-flex;
}
.children{
flex: 1;
}
flex: 1 denotes a ratio, similar to percentages of a element's width.
Check these two links in order to see simple live Flexbox examples:
https://njbenjamin.com/bundle-3.htm
https://njbenjamin.com/bundle-4.htm
If you use the 1st example:
https://njbenjamin.com/flex/index_1.htm
You can play around with your browser console, to change the display of the container element between flex and inline-flex.
You need a bit more information so that the browser knows what you want. For instance, the children of the container need to be told "how" to flex.
Updated Fiddle
I've added #wrapper > * { flex: 1; margin: auto; } to your CSS and changed inline-flex to flex, and you can see how the elements now space themselves out evenly on the page.
Open in Full page for better understanding
.item {
width : 100px;
height : 100px;
margin: 20px;
border: 1px solid blue;
background-color: yellow;
text-align: center;
line-height: 99px;
}
.flex-con {
flex-wrap: wrap;
/* <A> */
display: flex;
/* 1. uncomment below 2 lines by commenting above 1 line */
/* <B> */
/* display: inline-flex; */
}
.label {
padding-bottom: 20px;
}
.flex-inline-play {
padding: 20px;
border: 1px dashed green;
/* <C> */
width: 1000px;
/* <D> */
display: flex;
}
<figure>
<blockquote>
<h1>Flex vs inline-flex</h1>
<cite>This pen is understand difference between
flex and inline-flex. Follow along to understand this basic property of css</cite>
<ul>
<li>Follow #1 in CSS:
<ul>
<li>Comment <code>display: flex</code></li>
<li>Un-comment <code>display: inline-flex</code></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>
Hope you would have understood till now. This is very similar to situation of `inline-block` vs `block`. Lets go beyond and understand usecase to apply learning. Now lets play with combinations of A, B, C & D by un-commenting only as instructed:
<ul>
<li>A with D -- does this do same job as <code>display: inline-flex</code>. Umm, you may be right, but not its doesnt do always, keep going !</li>
<li>A with C</li>
<li>A with C & D -- Something wrong ? Keep going !</li>
<li>B with C</li>
<li>B with C & D -- Still same ? Did you learn something ? inline-flex is useful if you have space to occupy in parent of 2 flexboxes <code>.flex-con</code>. That's the only usecase</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
</figure>
<br/>
<div class="label">Playground:</div>
<div class="flex-inline-play">
<div class="flex-con">
<div class="item">1</div>
<div class="item">2</div>
<div class="item">3</div>
<div class="item">4</div>
</div>
<div class="flex-con">
<div class="item">X</div>
<div class="item">Y</div>
<div class="item">Z</div>
<div class="item">V</div>
<div class="item">W</div>
</div>
</div>
This question already has answers here:
Flexbox 3 divs, two columns, one with two rows
(3 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I have an HTML markup structure like so:
<div class="container>
<div id="one"></div>
<div id="two"></div>
<div id="three"></div>
</div>
I am trying to shape this markup into display flex row. Where div one takes up half the line width and the remaining divs take the other half of the line width but are stacked on top of each other in the same line as div one.
I realize that I should probably wrap div 2 and 3 in a div and then execute the design I am seeking. I am just wondering if it is possible to do so without wrapping div 2 and 3 in another div.
Thanks!
You will have to wrap them with another div, a quick example for it will be giving your container:
.container {
display: flex;
flex-direction: row;
}
Then, you make a wrapper for both two and three, and giving him:
.wrapper {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
That's the most basic thing, you will need to modify other things of course.
I have a flexbox in a side navigation that is overflowing it's granparent's height. The basic structure is:
<div class="holder">
<div class="block-item">content</div>
<div class="flex-nav">
<div class="flex-row"><img src="#"><img src="#"></div>
<div class="flex-row"><img src="#"><img src="#"></div>
<div class="flex-row"><img src="#"><img src="#"></div>
<div class="block-item">content</div>
<div>
.holder { height: 100vh;}
.block-item { display: block;}
.flex-nav { display: flex; flex-flow: column;}
.flex-row { flex: 1 1 0; display: flex;}
img { max-width: 100%;}
Somehow the flex-rows are not shrinking to fit their grandparent's 100vh. Instead, the images are going outside of the view port. From the articles I've read, I'm not sure if a grandchild takes into consideration it's grandparent's height restrictions, though I'm assuming it would. The actual code is slightly different and can be seen in the following codepen:
http://codepen.io/strasbal/pen/zNEMpj?editors=1100
However I'm not sure the exact specifications of Codepen's viewport, it may not show when changes are put into place, so the site url is http://www.webhosting-issues.com
I forked your pen.
Comments are included in the new pen that say /* NEW! */ to help you keep track of what changed, but, basically, since you had already set the height of the overall container at 100vh, I simply assigned a height in vh units to the header and footer that let them maintain the heights they already were, and then did the math to fill in the heights of other child elements.
Overall container is 100vh
Header logo and contact footer are 19vh each
That leaves 62vh for the middle section, made up of three rows
That's 20.666vh per row in the middle section
From there, just set explicit heights for the images and their wrapper links for the inner rows, and you’re was good to go.
One problem you run into is that the text in the links by the images can run out of their container on smaller screens. You could fix that by putting them inside spans and positioning them on top of the images, perhaps with a semi-transparent background.
Hope that works for you.
On a project I have four absolutely positioned elements on a page that sit inside an absolutely positioned container (the latter in order to align them relative to the viewport’s bottom, while more content will follow below the viewport). The four elements are next to each other and do not overlap.
Is there a way to (dynamically) center the four elements inside their absolutely positioned parent? I know it sounds weird, since absolute positioning means exactly no automatic placement.
Dynamically would mean that responsively the elements change both size and position at a certain breakpoint, but should still be centered horizontally in the viewport at all times.
I could think of a solution like this with an additional inner div, but didn’t get my head around to actually solving the puzzle, since I don’t know a good way for the inner div to grab the total width of its four absolutely positioned child elements:
<div class="myAbsoluteContainer">
<div class"myInnerDivForCentering">
<div class="myAbsoluteChildElement" id="child1"></div>
<div class="myAbsoluteChildElement" id="child2"></div>
<div class="myAbsoluteChildElement" id="child3"></div>
<div class="myAbsoluteChildElement" id="child4"></div>
</div>
</div>
I am not sure why you need to absolutely position the children. Is this what you are trying to achieve: http://jsfiddle.net/k65pxydx ?
.myAbsoluteContainer {
text-align: center; /* Centers the elements horizontally */
}
.myAbsoluteChildElement {
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: middle; /* Centers the elements vertically */
}