Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Since long time im using the below media queries to make responsive websites
// Large devices (desktops, less than 1200px)
#media (max-width: 1199px) { ... }
// Medium devices (tablets, less than 992px)
#media (max-width: 991px) { ... }
// Small devices (landscape phones, less than 768px)
#media (max-width: 767px) { ... }
// Extra small devices (portrait phones, less than 576px)
#media (max-width: 575px) { ... }
but when i checked bootsrap 4 , i notes they are using the below queries
/* Small. Above 34em (544px) */
#media screen and (min-width: 34em) { ... }
/* Medium. Above 48em (768px) */
#media screen and (min-width: 48em) { ... }
/* Large. Above 62em (992px) */
#media screen and (min-width: 62em) { ... }
/* Extra large. Above 75em (1200px) */
#media screen and (min-width: 75em) { ... }
im wondering should i continue on my way or its better to follow bootsrap way ,
and why they deside to start from small device to larg device?
Thank you
In its current form, your question is primarily opinion based.
It would have probably been better to ask if anyone knows what the reasons behind Bootstrap's approach might have been, although that question is, too, primarily opinion based. But your true chances of getting it answered are much higher here than trying to contact Bootstrap's authors.
And that's why I'll give you my own reasoning, coming from a hands-on approach: I need to get stuff done, it has to be fast and it has to be production ready.
As far as the order of #media queries goes, the only argument for using mobile-first over desktop-first is it sounds better for people who have no clue what it means. So you can always reply to your clients/boss, when they ask:
— Is it "mobile-first"?
— Of course, we use the latest technology...
But, in the real world, as long as your #media queries apply correct code to each responsiveness interval, you're doing-it-right.
The only things you should worry about are, in this order, where possible:
writing valid code
writing cross-device/cross-browser code
writing maintainable and easily readable code (for you and other devs)
writing less code for same functionality.
With regard to using em vs px, this is the second attempt by Bootstrap to dump px for em in #media queries. To my knowledge, the first attempt was dumped due to lack of support and differences in em calculation on a significant share of mobile browsers, at the time. However, a citation is needed here and I'm unable to find anything about that discussion which I remember reading ~2 years ago. I'm not even sure if it was around v3 or the v4 prototype, which was being released at the time. I think it was v4, though.
Anyway, if they decided to use em in v4, em is probably safe to use now.
Edit: Looking closer into v4 beta — released just 9 days ago, it looks like what you quoted is from the scss file, later parsed into px queries into the final dist code. So I am assuming the discussion I remember reading is still valid today. In conclusion, I would advise against using em in your CSS #media queries.
Last, but not least, the screen part should only be considered when you need to take care of how your page looks printed vs how it looks on screen.
If you do need to take care of this, depending on the differences between the two, you have to assess the amount of code you would override if all your existing (screen) code applied to print vs writing all print code from scratch.
If first is faster, don't add screen to your queries and place the #media print overrides last.
If the latter is faster, wrap existing code inside #media screen, add screen to your existing queries, as Bootstrap does, and place your print code inside another #media print, so it doesn't affect screen.
Note: I prefer the first method, as it is a hands-on approach, easily testable and it usually results in less code being written.
It doesn't really matter which way you choose, as long you pick one. Both accomplish same thing, but in different approach. In desktop-first your "base" styles are for desktop/large screens and you make changes for smaller screens, whereas in mobile-first you write "base" styles for mobile/small screens and make changes for larger screens. Both are fine and you can use whichever method you think makes more sense.
Related
I want to exclude iPads from using my CSS styling for desktop views on my website. I built my site mobile-first, so the desktop styles are in a media query.
While messing around with my code I tried this:
/*mobile and default styles (the styles I want the iPads to use)*/
#media (min-width: 750px;),
#media (device-width: 768px) and (device-height: 1024px) /*iPad resolution*/ {
/*desktop styles (the styles I don't want the iPad to use)*/
/*in this code, these styles are currently being ignored by iPads*/
}
I don't think this is valid code but it works correctly in every browser and device I have tested.
It has to do with having two #media lines on one media query. The second set of parameters are somehow excluded from the query, but I don't understand why. Without the second #media then it works like an or operator and the desktop styling will show up on an iPad.
I have tried nesting media queries, which doesn't seem to work, and I have tried using not, but the first line will still be true and thus it work work either.
I haven't found any information about using #media twice in a statement and having it somehow exclude the second media query, could someone explain the correct way to do this, or at least explain why this works?
Brilliant - yet incorrect syntax according to VS12.
Can be seen working here http://www.stilborg.com on iPad.
I'm developing a web app for feature phones in Africa (non- smartphones whose screen size is usually 128 x 160 px (1.80")).
I need to learn how to make the website responsive, or display properly for a screen size so small. I'm aware that regular CSS queries dont work well for feature phones, so any other suggestions?
This:
https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/other-devices/feature-phones?hl=en
is something I read on the topic, but it's vague for me to understand what changes to make in my CSS file (which is using bootstrap at the moment) Will really appreciate your help!
To make a website responsive we have to use CSS3 #media queries. Write #media queries for different screen sizes. But #media queries doesn't support for older version browsers. In your case (non-smartphone) #media doesn't work. I suggest create a sub domain for mobile phones like http://m.website.com and use javascript to redirect to mobile version site if user opens http://website.com .
#media only screen
and (min-device-width: 128px)
and (max-device-width: 160px)
{
/* Put your CSS Code for small screen */
}
Some useful articals about #media .
http://code.tutsplus.com/tutorials/quick-tip-a-crash-course-in-css-media-queries--net-14531
http://www.htmlgoodies.com/html5/tutorials/an-introduction-to-css3-media-queries.html
https://css-tricks.com/logic-in-media-queries/
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/07/19/how-to-use-css3-media-queries-to-create-a-mobile-version-of-your-website/
You can either try things like foundation which you can use pre-made tables, and sections with pre-defined css properties:
http://www.foundation.zurb.com/
Or you can use percentages, width: 15%. So it will get the designated percentage of your device and calculate the correct size based on that.
Also what your listed site is saying(google), it creates different css files based on your device. So when you use <link> to set your CSS file you can make it so certain devices use certain files:
(Taken from Google):
<link rel="alternate" media="only screen and (max-width: 640px)" href="http://m.example.com/page-1" />
I am asking this question here to get some information and ideas from the professionals. My question is I just start to learn Bootstrap 3.1 for my front end developments. So I have followed some basic tutorials regarding to the subject. With that tutorials, I found that the look and feels of every page layout have same structure and design. So I am afraid, Can we design advance and very different layout using Bootstrap 3.1?
Here I have attached a navigation bar. Someone can tell me, is it possible to design like this navigation bar using bootstrap 3.1?
I am not asking to someone to code this, just I ask this to make a strong sense about bootstrap 3.1.
hope someone pointed me out to the right direction.
Thank you.
Yes, it is easy to override any bootstrap styles you want.
It is designed to be usable out of the box, but also to provide good base styles in a logical way to be over ridden. The designers did not want to force you to use their styles.
If you use SASS or LESS, it will be easy. If you use the finished compiled CSS, it will be VERY tedious to edit.
I've built several apps entirely from Bootstrap 3, and most do not look like 'bootstrap' but use a ton of their base styles.
Simple answer, Yes you can. I don't think its that complicated to do. You can checkout the Grid system here in Bootstrap that meets your dimensions, it it doesn't meet then you always have your own custom grid made.
Hence you will have to do Media queries condition in your style-sheet on how will the site works on other devices.
/* Extra small devices (phones, less than 768px) */
/* No media query since this is the default in Bootstrap */
/* Small devices (tablets, 768px and up) */
#media (min-width: #screen-sm-min) { ... }
/* Medium devices (desktops, 992px and up) */
#media (min-width: #screen-md-min) { ... }
/* Large devices (large desktops, 1200px and up) */
#media (min-width: #screen-lg-min) { ... }
According to bootstrap-responsive.css file,the media query #media (max-width: 767px) is repeated meaning it occurs twice in the file.Why is it repeated?.
You can see the file here http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/assets/css/bootstrap-responsive.css
Hmmm, I certainly can't claim to understand what the developers intended when they wrote the CSS, but here's what I think...
I believe the repetition of media queries is just to provide greater modularization of the CSS file. Note that both #media (max-width: 767px) and #media (min-width: 768px) and (max-width: 979px) are actually present twice in the file, so it's not likely an anomaly.
The first declarations of these media queries appear to deal with classes that are added to elements to hide/show them at certain browser widths, so in effect selectively on different devices (specifying the display property). The second declarations seem to deal with the various classes that are foundational to Twitter Bootstrap's design principles, specifying styles (width, margin, min-height, etc.) of the various classes used in the 12-column grid system.
Classes of the first set can be applied at the whim of the developer, to hide/show certain elements when the page is viewed on various devices. Classes of the second set are applied a bit more rigidly than the first set, since they are a more defining characteristic of the framework's grid system (eg. You can give an element classes of both hidden-phone and visible-tablet from the first set and see the effects of both, but giving an element classes of span12 and span6 will cause only the last-given class to take effect).
It is because the first set of classes differs significantly in application from the second set of classes that the media queries declarations are declared twice, one for each set.
In Scalable and Modular Architecture for CSS (2012), Jonathan Snook comments on this concept of modularization, stating,
Yes, this does mean that the media query declaration may (and likely
will) get declared multiple times but it also allows for all
information about a module to be kept together.
(I apologize if I used the wrong terms when referring to styles/CSS/HTML! I'm still learning...)
I am working on a responsive site and my client wants certain styles to apply to the desktop at 768px but NOT to tablets at that size. I've tried multiple media queries but I can only get Firefox to cooperate. Chrome, Safari and IE all ignore the media query. Here is what I tried.
#media only screen and (min-width: 768px), not (min-device-width: 768px) and (max-device-width: 1024px) {
/* styles for desktop only here */
}
I think it has to do with the "not" operator but I don't see that I'm doing anything wrong. It's also worth mentioning that the ipad (in my simulator) ignores the media query which is exactly what I want. I just can't get the Chrome, Safari and IE on my desktop to read the dang thing.
Each and every Media Query string separated by commas should be fully formed (I'm not aware that in the spec anything carries over from one to the next ...although some browsers may support "shortcuts" here, it's prudent to stick to the lowest common denominator: the spec). (Among other things this makes testing easier since simple text mods allow you to test one Media Query at a time.) And of course "only" and "not" are mutually exclusive options. So I think the syntax should be
#media only screen and (min-width: 768px), not screen and (min-device-width: 768px) and (max-device-width: 1024px) {
(xxx-device-width: and xxx-width: [with inclusion or exclusion of "-device"] refer to the screen width and the viewport/layout width respectively [which are typically the same for "desktop" devices, and for most handhelds if <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width"> was specified, but may not be the same for smartphones without the "viewport" specification in the HTML source of the page). I don't typically see a mixture of the two in a single Media Query statement, and so [even though I haven't yet tried to understand this example in detail] I suspect something is a bit awry.)
You can't tell appart tablets and computers with resolution media queries : too much different resolutions on different hardware and no real common rule (have a look here, and that's only Androïd !)
You should detect touch support with Javascript, add a class to your HTML tag and build your CSS on this basis, bearing in mind it's not a 100% catch (there are touch computers.)
Try http://www.modernizr.com/ !
Other answers have suggested alternative approaches. I'll try and explain why what you were trying didn't work (as expected). I think this would be useful for people trying to get not working in media queries.
Negation of media expressions (individual parts like (min-device-width: 768px), as opposed to media queries, which are the full items in the comma-separated list, like only screen and (min-width: 768px)) requires CSS Level 4 which (AFAIK) is currently only supported in Firefox.
CSS Level 3 does support negation of full media queries (only), but if you use the not operator, you must also specify a media type.
So a Level 3 media query for 'not a tablet-sized device' would be not all and (min-device-width: 768px) and (max-device-width: 1024px) (or not screen and ... as suggested in #Chuck Kollars' answer).
not (min-device-width: 768px) and (max-device-width: 1024px) is not a valid Level 3 query but is a valid Level 4 query. However, not has greater precedence than and so it actually means (not (min-device-width: 768px)) and (max-device-width: 1024px) which is not what you intended.
The inner CSS rules are applied whenever any of the media queries in the list match. In other words, the comma (,) acts like an or operator. So what you were trying actually means 'at least 768px wide, or not a tablet', which will match almost everything (or would do with the media type added to the second query so it can be parsed by Level 3 browsers).
The only way I can think of to achieve what you were intending with CSS Level 3 would be something like
#media screen and (min-width: 768px) and (min-device-width: 1025px),
screen and (min-width: 768px) and (max-device-width: 767px) {
}
(Though the second media query now looks probably superfluous and unlikely to match.)
But as stated in #mddw's answer, this won't exclude all tablets and may even exclude some other devices.