I may well be asking for the moon on a stick, here, but: I'm trying to figure out how to get a two-colour background to delineate the two columns of the main content.
The background must be full viewport width (edge-to-edge), and the central content is responsive with a max-width of 960px, split into two columns; the first column is 2/3 of the width (max of 640px wide) and the second column takes up the remaining 1/3 (max of 320px wide). Probably the easiest way to explain it is with a GIF:
As you can see, the left-hand part of the light blue 'sidebar' background colour always lines up with the left side of the actual sidebar column. It was pointed out to me that the checkout on woothemes.com has pretty much this exact same effect (although I think you need to add something to your basket to see it). They appear to have achieved it with linear-gradient, and it boils down to this:
background: linear-gradient(90deg,#fff 53.5%,#f0f4f5 46.5%);
background: -moz-linear-gradient(left,#fff 52%,#f0f4f5 46.5%);
The problems are:
I don't understand these declarations at all - why are the second color-stop's values lower than the first (and why is the -moz declaration's first color-stop a different percentage)? Adjusting it doesn't seem to make a difference, but I definitely need to update the values, as they don't match what I need... but I don't get it.
Although the effect is close, it unfortunately is not perfect: for a start, the stop between the two colours is kinda blurry; and worse, the line does 'drift' when rescaling. Although it's only by a small amount, unfortunately it's enough to kill the illusion with the design I've been given.
I've tried a couple of methods, including variations of linear-gradient and a pseudo-element with percentage & calc()-based offsets, but I'm totally not getting it. I've debated whether this is something I can achieve with some super-clever SVG element handling, but I seem to be totally stuck on something that looks deceptively simple.
Is there a way to achieve this with pure CSS?
I didn't look into the woothemes.com example, but here's my take:
http://jsbin.com/jofeseseyo/edit?css,output
This would need to be adapted a bit based on the rest of the site, but the idea is: one container of max 960px, with two children (66.666% and 33.333% width). Each child has a pseudo-element that is absolutely positioned at the point where the two columns meet. Then they are z-indexed behind everything.
I don't know how the rest of your site looks, so I left the rest a bit arbitrary. The background color columns have a fixed height, right now at 200vh.
Related
I’ve been working on this for over 10 hours, searching the web for a solution, to no avail.
Here is the screen capture of the sketch:
I need to produce a grid layout with the following requirements:
The whole thing is in a horizontal scrolling layout.
Responsive in height, relative to its container (which is already responsive relative to body, using the Stretch-to-margin technic).
3 lines of equal height (33.333%)
Composed of square images anchors
On mouse over: color overlay with white text
The square images need to keep their proportion (reduce the height of the window, image width must scale down.
The width of the whole layout must be dynamic, since the number of squares may vary.
I’ve seen tons of examples where the width is defined, and using the padding-top value to define the height. It would not work here since the Height is the defining value.
I will be posting again with updates tomorrow.
I’m kinda desperate. Thinking of taking up drinking (kidding).
The Question is Answered!
I finally used the "vh" unit, and applied it to HEIGHT and WIDTH of all the squares.
Goes something like this:
.c-squares{
width:30vh;
height:30vh;
display:inline;
}
So clean, can’t believe I’ve never knew about "vh" unit.
I always wondered how to fix the gap between floating elements if they don't have the same height:
Here you can see a gap between Featured and Notice which I would like to get rid of. (Get's even larger when the screen resolution is larger since the Featured box becomes more stretched and thus the text spreads over less lines)
Maybe important to note that this is the order of the floating left elments:
Featured
News
Headlines
Notice
Layout for smaller screens (this is looking perfectly fine I just wanted to show you what I mean in the following description with inconsistent layout based on screen resolution)
If the design would be consistent I wouldn't mind implementing some kind of grid system but in my case I'm using styles based on screen resolution so at a certain screen resolution the boxes change from 50% to 100% width (no fixed value used here).
I thought that fluid girds might be the right way to go but after checking them (never used them before) they feel rather static and I'm not sure that they can solve this problem.
EDIT:
Sample of the broblem: http://jsfiddle.net/UfVrH/. Note the fixed height values in A-D are only there to simulate content stretching the div.
To fix such an issue you need to calculate the width and height of each element and re-arrange them by positioning them absolutely, luckily for you there is such a plugin that does this, Isotope
What are good and recommended uses of percentage values for vertical CSS declarations?
In other words, under responsive design, are we overlooking something where % would be beneficial over em?
Because it seems that for most situations (except for cases where you want all sides equal; credit), em would be better served than %, consider:
Using percentages for the horizontal values of padding, margin or border of elements in CSS is fairly standard — especially in responsive web design. For example, take margin-left: 7.2% and padding: 0 5%. It also makes sense: the wider the screen, then the space will increase proportionally.
One can do the same for the vertical values:
margin-top: 5%;
padding: 10% 0;
border: 1% 0 2% 0;
As expected, an increasing viewport width will increase the corresponding vertical spaces.
However, in the cases I've come across, it can look a bit odd — unfitting to the design. It seems that em values may be better served.* But, on the other hand, where would it be beneficial to use percentages?
* Since these won't increase with the width of the screen, but will increase according to the font size of the page.
I don't think there's any right or wrong answers to this question. It really does depend on your design.
As you noted, % values, even on vertical-based properties on margin & padding, are still relative to the width of the document. So if your design requires even padding, then % values all round are great.
But, if the design is content oriented, and you're still using % values on the horizontal properties for responsive design, % might not be the best for the vertical properties. You may, for example, want the padding-top to be exactly the height of 1 line of text. So you'd use ems.
But I digress; it really does depend on your design and personal preference.
Yes, depending on the situation just like any other css practice.
Say you have a container div that uses 100% of the screen height and you have a header you want to appear at the top of your div. You could say margin-top: 15px on your header, which works, but then if I come and view it on my phone it will look very squished.
So instead you say margin-top: 10% then no matter what screen I come and view your site on your header is always 10% from the top of the div. which means the relative flow of your layout will always be the same.
The general rule is this: For any valid css you can write there is a use-case where it would be the best way to go about achieving your design goal. Forget anyone who says "Never use negative margins" or "always avoid absolute positioning" or any of the other crap they throw around.
I have been pondering this question as well recently and after reading around the internet the 'rule of thumb' I'm beginning to lean on is as follows. First, the reason why % is good responsive design for the horizontal axis is because as we all know the width of your browser can vary greatly depending whether the user is on a phone or computer. The vertical axis is different however because while it can also vary like the horizontal axis, many webpages are created for a vertical scroll and the user is expecting to scroll down. In such cases a little more vertical scrolling due to less responsive ems is fine.
To answer your question based on that assumption, a time in which you would use % for the vertical margin is when you have a design where you don't want to make the user scroll much to see a part of the page. Specific examples might be a single-page web app where you don't want any scrolling or a header or initial page content such as a picture that you would want the user to see in its entirety without having to scroll down.
I have this working fine: http://jsfiddle.net/uwcEw/ - a traditional border layout on css.
What I want to do is have another 5-region border layout within the "middle" of the border layout. Re-applying the same pattern from above I get this: http://jsfiddle.net/6bked/4/ (edited link), which does not work, clearly it is not relative to it's parent container, but i'm not sure how to fix this so i can apply this pattern as needed in a nested context.
Any help? Also if there's a better way to do this (Compass+Sass/blueprint/js layout) I'm open to suggestions.
UPDATE
I also wanted to make clear I only care about this working in modern browsers (Webkit, FF) mostly concerned with Webkit and I am not worried about users who don't have javascript enabled
I'm not exactly the biggest fan of fixed layouts, but if I understand correctly this should be what you're trying to do: http://jsfiddle.net/8Cq9A/.
The dimensions are relative to the browser window, even the nested set of div's. What you needed to do to fix your layout was adjust your inner dimensions taking that into account. For example if your outer left and right div's widths are set to 10% (meaning 10% of the width of the browser window) to split the center div into 2 equal halves, you'd set each of their widths to: (100% - 10% - 10%) / 2 = 40%.
Personally, I'd look into using floats: http://jsfiddle.net/Sf8Kp/. The issue you will run into here though, is if you're wanting equal height columns as seen in the link.
There are MANY articles floating around on how to tackle this though. A few good reads that have been around for a while: alistapart (1, 2), positioniseverything. Search around for faux columns and 3 column [liquid|elastic|equal height] layout.
First see http://jsfiddle.net/b2BpB/15/
3 columns, aligned to the top of a container which is centred on the page. When the browser window is wider than the container - the example above is good.
When you shrink the width of the browser window - the columns start to stack down the page.
Question: How can I make it so that the outer two columns have a z-index lower then the centre column, so that when the browser window is squeezed, width-wise, instead of the columns stacking down the page, the outer columns slide under (behind) the centre column?
Note: I need to keep the present behaviours. 3 divs align to top of container. 3 divs grow / shrink to fit their contents (can't use fixed width, hight divs for the columns)
--added 19 April 2010 am UK--
This one seems to be stumping everyone - I've added a couple of more tags to see if anyone else can figure it out.
It may help me & others even if you post your initial ideas and explain why they wont work in this instance - to help avoid dead ends.
One avenue I looked at is using iframes instead of divs - but auto resizing iframes in a cross-domain application requires some exotic javascript. I would like to avoid javascript, let alone this cross domain hack. - I think this is a dead end - unless you know otherwise.
Thanks in advance...
--added 19 April 2010 13:44 UK--
#RoToRa - here I get absolute top positioning, divs size to fit content & divs sliding under the main centre div with no stacking down the page as the window is squeezed:
http://jsfiddle.net/qr7WB/
I have used inline style - but this is easy to extract to the CSS file - if I ever get it to do what I want.
If I can just get the left & right divs to but up to the centre div - only sliding under when the browser window forces them to, then bingo!
In terms of the application: I want a 3 col web site. The centre col holds the main content and I want it to take precedent. The outside columns are for subordinate content and ads.
First off: This isn't an answer, however I have several points and it's more readable as an answer.
I don't think what you want is possible. Having elements slide under each other is normally something one want to avoid, so it's not a "standard behavior" of CSS.
You'd have to use absolute positioning to have elements overlap each other, but then you can't have the elements adjust width and height to their contents.
The best I can think of is JavaScript, which could be based on the existing layout (so that it would still be displayed without JavaScript), and just "kick in", when the elements need to overlap. However that wouldn't be a simple script to write, because calculating the correct width it needs to react too, isn't simple.
Another alternative could be CSS 3 Media Queries, which allow you define different CSS rules based on window size, however that would require you to know at exactly which width you want the change.
As I mentioned having elements overlap - especially when they contain text, which one would expect to be able to read - is something one usually tries to avoid. Maybe you should describe your exact scenario (which elements contain which kind of information, and why it's ok for them to overlap) instead of your perceived solution, then it may be possible to suggest alternatives.
BTW I can't see how iframes would have to do with problem at all.
Do You mean like this?
Example Fiddle : HERE
if that's it it will depend on what widths you can or can't set, but if that's the idea more specs would help
It's all floated or inline-block, no absolute positioning so flow should remain to allow for footers to follow.. let me know!
Updated fiddle per comments : HERE