user have ability to set height of some div in "px". And if he do that, than some div have height like this:
height: 245px;
but if this is done, then height stays the same which is not good for responsive design. Because i want that that div needs to adjusts to the conditions of responsive design.
So my question is what could I do in css to make div responsive ?
that later the height of div adjusts to the conditions of responsive design.
therefore, the height of div does not need to be fixed.
I have also tried this:
height: 100vw;
max-height: 245px;
but this also not works, as div stays at height of 245px.
Thank you
Convert the PXto %, so it will be responsive.
use the formula:
size-in-pixel/Screen-Size*100 = it gives the percentage
in your code in place of the size in pixel enter the value in percentage
Related
I have a div that needs to be full screen width inside a parent div that has a limited with. Simplified, it's something like:
HTML:
<div class="container">
<div class="banner">
</div>
</div>
CSS:
.container {
width: 1170px;
margin: auto;
}
.banner {
width: 100vw;
margin-left: calc( 50% - 50vw);
}
which works fine, except for one thing: The scrollbar on the page covers some of the content in the child div, because 100vw appearantly includes the scrollbar width. So is there a way around this so I can set the width to (100vw - scrollbar width), or perhaps a completely different way to achieve what I want to do with pure CSS?
Try to use % where you can. vw is a percent of the viewport width including the scrollbar and % is a percent of the wrapper object, where the body is not rendered inside the scrollbar.
Don't use a fixed width (px) container. It's bad practice and will not render well on mobile screens. See Responsive Web Design for more.
Don't use vw for containers (or banners). It has weird effects on the scrollbar.
Finally, I don't understand why you want something to be at 300vw or 3x the width of the viewport, but sure. If you designed your page right with responsive web design and avoided setting any wrapper's dimensions with px, then it shouldn't be hard to know what that width of the containing div is. For example, if the wrapper (containing div) is at 30% of the viewport and you want your banner to be 300% of the viewport, then you want 1000% for your banner to span the width of three screens.
You could set the scrollbar width and subtract it from the container's width using 'pure CSS'.
You could give width to the scroll bar in webkit-browsers using:
body::-webkit-scrollbar {
width: scrollbarwidthpx;
}
and set the content width as:
width: calc(100vw - scrollbarwidthpx);
You could make use of this article regarding customizing scrollbar
So I've been trying to create a simple page where the image takes up 100% of the height, with a small sidebar. I want the image to resize itself when I resize the window. When I resize the window vertically, the width stays the same, which is not what I want (I want it to retain it's aspect ratio whatever the window size). I really dislike this distortion, but am unsure of how to fix it. Any idea what I'm doing wrong?
.big-image {
max-height: 100%;
min-width: 20%;
margin: auto;
overflow: hidden;
}
set display: block or display: inline-block to your .big-image class, in order for the max-height and min-width property to work. These properties, along with height, width, min-height, max-width, padding-top, padding-bottom, margin-top and margin-bottom doesn't work on inline elements.
You can set either the height or width of an image to auto and control the other property with a set size whether that be percentage or px. That auto should maintain the aspect ratio of the image while you get to control the size of the image with the other property.
max-width:100% and height:auto will work. When applying max-width:1000%; it will take the width of the container and height will be proportionately varied.
I have an image something like below.
<img src="file.jpg" />
Below is the css code
img {
max-width: 100%;
height: auto;
}
Can anyone explain me on how does this css code make the images responsive, I mean scale it perfectly. I want to know the working behind this css code.
When your parent width is smaller than width of image, image width will take 100% of parent width.
If parent width is bigger than image width, image width will stay original.
Same with max-height. Also min-width/min-height will ensure that width/height will not be smaller than specified.
height: auto; will preserve aspect ratio for image. If you set both max-height and max-width or set height to specific size than image will be stretched
When you apply max-width:100%; to any element then that perticular element could have maximum 100% width of its parent, thus it can give you gaurantee that child will never go out of parent's bounds.
Thus if parent has suffitient width then child is shown in it's original size, otherwise it's width is matched to the parent. Thus it make our layout responsive.
Here is example : http://jsfiddle.net/xxn2hfuL/
is it possible to have a div (or other element) resize its height in relation to its width (or the other way around) using CSS? basically, to get it to behave the way an image with a percentage width resizes proportionally as the browser window is resized?
If you want to set a width or height relative to a .parent element and you know the aspect ratio that needs to be maintained, you can do something like this:
.parent{
width: 150px;
}
.child{
width: 100%;
padding-top: 50%; /* outer height will be 75px (150px*0.5) */
}
Note that you are relying on having a height (or width) of 0 and defining it based on the padding only. So, if you want to add any content you will probably need to wrap it within an absolutely positioned div within .child. See this fiddle for an example
Look at this related question. In short: No, it's not possible using only CSS
I've got a container that's set to a max-width:780px and height is undeclared. Inside the container, there's an image slideshow. Everything on the page is responsive, so as the width decreases, the image (who's width is set to 100%) adjust's the heights container.
The slideshow change's the images to display:static; and position:absolute; which no longer "holds open" the container because it's not seen as content of the container
Is there any creative solution out there to take the height of a child element that's absolutely positioned?
Example below has NO height declared on the main container.. nothing's holding it open.
http://dhut.ch/test/santos/
Thank you!
Are the images all the same dimensions? If yes, you can use a percentage padding-top on the element that contains the images.
So if your images are all, say, 760px wide by 500px tall, that's 500/760 = .65789
Which as percentage would translate into something like:
#main {
position: relative;
max-width: 760px;
padding-top: 65.789%;
}
The reason this works is because with padding if it's set with a percentage, it is calculated as a percentage of the width. As the element shrinks in width, the height will shrink proportionately and the box will remain in the same ratio of width to height. The images, positioned absolutely, won't be adding to the height of the box.
This'll work as long as your images are all the same aspect ratio and you're not expecting that ratio to change. If you'll be using a lot of random images, this isn't for you.
I recently had a similar problem with an image that I needed to absolute position at the top of a Zurb Foundation templated page in order to pull it out of the flow and reset its dimensions (Image had to stretch to edges of wrapper, instead be enclosed by its parent .row padding). However, of course, this meant that all the fluid responsive elements below it popped right up over the top of the image. Setting a margin-top or positioning the sibling elements below meant a rigid top space that didn't resize with the width of the browser.
To get around it, I placed a duplicate of the image right after the absolute positioned image and set its visibility: hidden; I had to add a little bit of extra margin bottom to make up for the difference in height, but the end result is everything on the page flowing exactly to the height of the image in use.
I've also used the padding trick described by unexplainedBacn above, and it's a great trick as well. It takes a little bit of math, but I voted that answer up. Great solution.
I think you'd better change your approach. For sliders, the best practices is to float child elements of the container, and also use one of the known techniques to prevent parent's great collapse. So, I suggest that you remove the position: absolute CSS rule from images and float them inside your <div id='main'>, then use any of these methods to force it to encompass it's children:
div#main {overflow: hidden;}
div#main:after {content: ''; display: block; clear: both; visibility: hidden;}
Add a <div style='clear: both;'> to the end of your main div container.
Remove the absolute position. I would avoid inline styling as well.