I am trying to place two images side by side. I want them to be full width and responsive. However, I can't figure out how to get them on the same line. Does anyone have solutions? Here is a fiddle - https://jsfiddle.net/0je558ex/
<div class="food-featured-posts">
<div class="food-featured-posts-first">
<img src="https://static.pexels.com/photos/2855/landscape-mountains-nature-lake.jpg"/ >
</div>
<div class="food-featured-posts-second">
<img src="https://static.pexels.com/photos/4164/landscape-mountains-nature-mountain.jpeg"/ >
</div>
</div>
food-featured-posts {
width: 100%;
margin-bottom: 100px;
}
.food-featured-posts-first img {
width: 50%;
height: 50%;
display:inline-block
}
.food-featured-posts-second img {
width: 50%;
height: 50%;
display:inline-block
}
You have two problems actually.
First, you're setting the styling of the img, but the div which wraps them are implicitly styled to basically be: display:block;width:100%;.
Simply remove the divs.
Second, and slightly more interestingly, your img elements still will not render next to each other at 50% because any whitespace between two display:inline-block elements means that the total size is greater than 100%, so the second element is kicked to the second line.
You therefore need to put the img tags on the same line—frustrating, I know.
See this question: CSS two div width 50% in one line with line break in file
<div class="food-featured-posts">
<!-- Note these are on the same line -->
<img src="https://static.pexels.com/photos/2855/landscape-mountains-nature-lake.jpg"/ ><img src="https://static.pexels.com/photos/4164/landscape-mountains-nature-mountain.jpeg"/ >
</div>
food-featured-posts {
width: 100%;
margin-bottom: 100px;
}
.food-featured-posts img {
width: 50%;
display:inline-block;
}
Set the divs that wrap the image to width: 50%; display: inline-block; and set the img tags to width: 100%; so they will take up the entire div, then remove the space between the inline-block div elements in your HTML since spaces on inline elements take up space and the space will exceed 100% width (since each div takes up 50%).
img {
width: 100%;
}
.food-featured-posts > div {
width: 50%;
display: inline-block;
}
<div class="food-featured-posts">
<div class="food-featured-posts-first">
<img src="https://static.pexels.com/photos/2855/landscape-mountains-nature-lake.jpg"/ >
</div><div class="food-featured-posts-second">
<img src="https://static.pexels.com/photos/4164/landscape-mountains-nature-mountain.jpeg"/ >
</div>
</div>
Related
Is there a way to center vertically and horizontally everything automatically inside different container in the same page? I tried use top 50% and vertically-align, but it didn't work. I want to center vertically automatically because if the object/text change size, it will center exactly right place. I succeed center horizontally and I don't want to use top: px;. How do I do that using html5 and css? center everything automatically
no center
vertical-align will only align inline elements relative to each other. It will not work the way you want.
To align vertically just as you show in your image, you need to use display: flex; which has additional css properties which you may find useful.
basically you can use
position: absolute;
top: 50%;
transform: translate(-50%);
for vertical alignment.
But for this to work, the surrounding elements have to have either a fixed height, or if they have a percentage height, also their parent elements and all elements around these all the way up to the body element need to have percentage heights.
Here's an alternative solution that defines table properties for the DIVs. In a table cell the content can be centered not only horizontally, but also vertically (in class .x).
Codepen: http://codepen.io/anon/pen/WwjQZw
HTML:
<div class="wrap">
<div class="row_wrap">
<div class="head x">
ONE
</div>
</div>
<div class="row_wrap">
<div class="middle x">
TWO TWO
</div>
</div>
<div class="row_wrap">
<div class="bottom x">
THREE
</div>
</div>
</div>
CSS:
body {
font-size: 36px;
color: green;
}
.wrap {
display: table;
width: 100%;
}
.row_wrap {
display: table-row;
}
.x {
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: middle;
text-align: center;
}
.head {
height: 200px;
background: #fa4;
}
.middle {
height: 400px;
background: #4af;
}
.bottom {
height: 100px;
background: #a4f;
}
I am trying to position a child DIV at the bottom of a parent DIV, but I would also like the contents of the child DIV to help dictate the dimensions of the parent DIV. As I have it right now, the child DIV doesn't affect the width/height of the parent DIV.
Here is a sample of my HTML/CSS code:
//HTML code:
<div id="parent">
<h3>Top Aligned Title</h3>
<div id="child"></div>
</div>
//CSS code:
#parent {
background-color:#222;
position: relative;
height: 500px;
}
#child {
background-color:#444;
position: absolute;
bottom: 0px;
width: 100px;
height: 200px;
}
What do I need to do it achieve what I am trying to do? I could forgo the absolute/relative CSS rules and simply create a table within the parent DIV which would allow me to achieve both bottom alignment and content that dictates the parent's dimensions.
However, I'd like to know if there a way to do this in CSS and without having to set the width of the parent DIV.
thanks in advance!
The short answer is that what you are asking basically can't be done with pure CSS / HTML. (at least without tables) You'd need Javascript that would read #child's width/height and then do the calculation you want to do (I don't know) and set a new height/width to #parent.
Otherwise, if you mean that you want #child's height/width to change according to its content, of course this is native CSS, just set it's height/width to auto and then start adding text inside it you'll see it will start growing to fit your content inside.
As the #child is positioned absolute, then it is taken OUT of the normal flow of the document, therefore it will not affect the #parent.
With modern CSS, this is doable.
HTML:
<div id="parent">
<h3>Top Aligned Title</h3>
<div id="child">
<p>CHILD ELEMENT</p>
</div>
</div>
CSS:
#parent {
background:red;
height: 500px;
position:relative;
}
#child {
background:green;
position: absolute;
top:100%;
-webkit-transform: translateY(-100%);
-ms-transform: translateY(-100%);
transform: translateY(-100%);
width: 100px;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/Bushwazi/bpe5s6x3/
transform:translateY(-100%); is the trick. It's math is based on the element's box-model.
You could also combine top:50%; with transform:translateY(-50%); to center it.
You can swap top for left and translateY for translateX to position the element horizontally.
Here you go
HTML:
<main id="parent">
<div class="popup">Top Aligned Title
<div class="content">
Content
</div>
</div>
</main>
CSS:
#parent {
width: 120px;
}
.popup {
position: relative;
margin-top: 48px;
}
.content {
left: 0;
position: absolute;
background: green;
width: 100%;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/8L9votay/
You can play around with flex and zero-width/height.
I've recently come up with the following solution (for width):
#parent {
display: inline-flex;
flex-direction: column;
background: #518cff;
color: #fff;
}
#child-wrapper {
height: 0; /* This can also be max-height, but height is just enough */
}
#child {
transform: translateY(-100%); /* If you need to align child to the bottom */
background: #b40000;
color: #fff;
}
<div id="parent">
<h3>Top Aligned Title</h3>
<div id="child-wrapper"> <!-- This is the solution -->
<div id="child">
Child's content that is longer than parent's
</div>
</div>
</div>
The following code has a DIV that needs to be positioned at the top of the container, another at the bottom and then the content needs to come through in the middle.
<div style="position:absolute; top:0; width:100%; height:40px"></div>
<div class="howto"></div>
<div style="position:absolute; bottom:0; width:100%; height:40px"></div>
So we don't know the height of the containing DIV. How without JS can the div with class howto have the height of the container DIV less the height of the absolute positioned div at the top and bottom so as to contain content between these 2 DIVs.
For what you wish to accomplish, this is one possible solution:
#tinkerbin: http://tinkerbin.com/QsaCPgR6
HTML:
<div class="container">
<div class="header"></div>
<div class="howto">
Has height set to auto. You may change that if you want to.
</div>
<div class="footer"></div>
</div>
CSS:
.container {
position: relative;
padding: 40px 0; /* top and bottom padding = .header and .footer padding*/
}
.header,
.footer {
position: absolute;
height: 40px;
width: 100%;
}
.header {
top: 0;
}
.footer {
bottom: 0;
}
.howto {
height: /*specifiy one if you wish to*/;
}
As far as I know there isn't a pure CSS way to do what you're trying to do without JS.
See this previous post on SA:
Make a div fill the height of the remaining screen space
I found a lot of questions on stack overflow about getting rid of white space, but I can't seem to figure out how to put it in.
I have a bottom navigation on my site that floats with the page, but if the window is small, the bottom part of the page gets covered up. I would like to insert some white space at the bottom, so when the window is smaller than the length of the page you can still read it.
I've tried adding:
margin-bottom: 50px;
padding-bottom: 50px;
to the div containing the top page content, but it doesn't work.
Is there something I am missing? Here's a demonstration: http://www.writingprompts.net/name-generator/
#left, #right {
margin-bottom: 90px;
}
or
#top_section > div {
margin-bottom: 90px;
}
It doesn't work on #top_section because you use absolutes and therefore the content actually over extends the div itself, but trust me, either of those two css' i gave you WILL work
Simply add the following rule:
#top_section {
overflow: hidden;
padding-bottom: 90px;
}
This will make #top_section be as big as the floating content inside it.
http://jsfiddle.net/rlemon/fSYmu/ This is a simplified example, having no idea what your layout looks like (I am not going to assume the demonstration is yours... unless you revise and tell me it is) i'll show you how I would do this
HTML
<div class="container"> <!-- main page wrapper -->
<div class="content"> <!-- main content wrapper, backgrounds apply here -->
<div class="inner-content"> <!-- content inner, where your content goes! -->
content
</div>
</div>
<div class="footer">footer</div> <!-- footer -->
</div>
CSS
html,body,.container {
height: 100%; margin: 0; padding: 0; // I am important so the page knows what 100% height is.
}
.content {
height: 100%; // see above... i need to cascade down.
background-color: green;
}
.content-inner {
padding-bottom: 100px; // offset for the footer.
}
.footer {
width: 100%;
position: absolute; // stick me to the bottom.
bottom: 0;
height: 100px;
background-color: red;
}
enjoy!
You need to use fixed position in CSS to achieve this.
HTML:
<div id="top-section">
Insert content here...
</div>
<div id="bottom-nav">
<div id="content">
Bottom content...
</div>
</div>
CSS:
#bottom-nav {
bottom: 0;
position: fixed;
width: 100%;
}
#content {
margin: 0 auto;
width: 960px;
}
A simple (one might think!) question to all CSS gurus: I would like to shrink a DIV snugly around an IMG. The IMG is 600 x 800 and I needed it much smaller. So I go {height: 100%; width: auto;} and constrain the height via a wrapper DIV. However, to maintain the (unknown to me) AR, I cannot fix the width on the DIV. I tried to set the wrapping DIV to "display: inline-block" or "float: left" or "position: absolute" or ... - no matter: most browsers will stretch that DIV 800px wide - the original width of the full-size IMG - so it looks sthg like this:
[[IMG].............................]
Bizarrely, I can add some text to the DIV (just to test), and that text will actually appear right next to the scaled IMG:
[[IMG]Hello world..................]
Does anyone here know why the original size of the IMG matters (for dimensioning the width, it does not affect the height)? And what I might be able to do to shrink the DIV?
Thanks for looking.
EDIT:
To test Pär Wieslander's idea, I wrote a little test bed that should help clarify what I am on about:
<style type="text/css">
html, body {
height: 100%;
}
#dialog {
background: green;
height: 50%;
position: relative;
}
#frame {
border: 2px solid black;
display: inline-block;
height: 100%;
position: absolute;
}
#img {
height: 100%;
width: auto;
}
</style>
<body>
<div id="dialog">
<div id="frame">
<img id='img' src='...' />
</div>
</div>
</body>
Just pick any large IMG of your choice. You should find an inexplicably wide frame around and image that has squeezed - height-wise - onto the green carpet.
If you specify the image's width or height as a percentage, that percentage is calculated in proportion to the size of the parent block. So specifying width: 50% on the image doesn't mean 50% of the original image width -- it means 50% of the width of the parent block. The same goes for the height. Thus, there will always be extra space around the image as long as you specify the width or height as a percentage.
The solution is simple -- specify the dimensions in pixels, ems or any other unit other than a percentage:
HTML
<div class="wrapper">
<img class="small" src="myimage.jpg">
</div>
CSS
img.small {
width: 150px; /* or whatever you like */
display: block; /* to avoid empty space below the image */
}
div.wrapper {
display: inline-block;
border: 1px solid #000;
}
Edit: Based on your comments and updated post, I understand that what you really want to do is to set the width of the surrounding div and make the image fill up that div. Here's an example that does that:
HTML
<div class="wrapper big">
<img src="myimage.jpg">
</div>
<div class="wrapper small">
<img src="myimage.jpg">
</div>
CSS
img {
display: block;
width: 100%;
}
.wrapper {
margin-top: 1em;
border: 1px solid #000;
}
.big {
width: 600px;
}
.small {
width: 300px;
}
So I go height="50%", say, and width="auto" (to maintain AR).
Why not just go width="50%" too as this would resolve it.
I think Pär's approach is right: don't do { height: fix; width: auto; } but do instead { height: auto; width: fix; } Works better.