I need to construct something like this: https://youtu.be/-pv77UW1w6g
But I'm facing problems to set div side by side with no space between them.
I made a wireframe to help to show my idea like the video above: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9095670/multiple-divs.jpg
It's important to say that I'm using bootstrap and it's a responsive project. So, I don't want use fixed width or heigh (if possible) to do that. I've tried use display: inline, but I got many holes between them due the fixed min-height.
Thanks a lot for the help.
The issue lies in the fact that you markup likely has whitespace between the elements, the simplest way to avoid this is to set font-size: 0px; in the document body, then add a class to each child div that re-sets the font size back to whatever you want.
just do this:
<div class="wrap">
<div class="children">1</div>
<div class="children">2</div>
<div class="children">3</div>
</div>
http://codepen.io/damianocel/pen/PPEqJm
Ok here you go.
You can comment out the keyframes, but I have put a bit animation in it, your video made me:-).
To explain this...as you see, there is no height declaration on the divs, only on the main wrapper div. And on the img tags, for demo purposes.
As you can see the divs will adapt height to whatever content is placed in to them.
Same for the pictures, you make them the size you want.
With the flexbox layout as it is there, I make the divs being placed as column, i.e. vertically. There is a height declaration on the main div, this one you will need if you want to display it like this, but only this one, without a height on main div, flexbox would never create a next column, it would just stack them one over the next. This way, as soon the height is reached, it creates a new horizontal column. This would be possible in other ways as well and takes some understanding of the flexbox model, do look into it, i thinks it is the future of layout.
And you set a width on the children class, i set it to 30% here, for 3 rows(flex will still create a 4th,5th etc, but these would fall out of the wrap div, so, a bit calculation is needed on your part.
Play around with it and see what happens if you change the children class width, or put more/less text in it, careful with margin, margin is bit odd with flexbox, this is beyond the scope here though.
Do not be afraid when flexbox creates a new row, don't try to fix it with margins when it looks odd(new or od row having a gap etc, you will see what i mean).
And this will be fully responsive as it is.
* {
box-sizing: border-box;
}
#keyframes bro{
1% {transform: skew(5deg, 6deg);}
25% {transform: skew(10deg, 5deg);}
75% {transform: skew(15deg,9deg);}
90% {transform: rotate(720deg) scale(0.1);}
}
http://codepen.io/damianocel/pen/PPEqJm
If you have any question, ask anytime.
Thanks for all help, but I solved my problem with Masonry as hungerstar said. The Masonry is good if you're using Angular.js too.
Related
EDIT - As requested here's the Fiddle jsfiddle.net/daghene/eq4tfzLn/
I've already searched a lot on Stackoverflow and Google to find an answer to this but even if there's plenty I don't know why they're not working nor if I'm handling this layout correctly.
Basically I'm using Skeleton responsive framework to make a one-page layout and I have a section where there's a row with this image on the left and text on its right. Below it there's a small twitter paragraph with the latest news.
Basically my problem is: when the first row gets too small and the text starts getting long the image gets way too small and I thought the best solution is to vertically center it, but both it and the div's height are responsive(most solutions requires at least one of the two to be fixed height).
What's your suggestion and far more importantly am I handling this layout well on a logical perspective or is it ok to have paragraphs get THAT long with the image simply sticking to the top?
Note that it displays fine on desktop, tablet and smartphones, there's just that little part where it gets kinda weird...here's the screenshot of how my layout is acting, the third one being the one that I think should be fixed since it's kinda ugly to look at and maybe centering the image would help.
P.s. one thing I forgot, haven't put my code since Skeleton, as most responsive Frameworks, simply requires a .container class with .row and .X columns inside it to give the divs size and centering and I didn't add anything on top of that yet. The only thing I think I'll do is put the sections in a fixed height's div because I plan on making the user scroll them as slides and they'll always need to be 100% viewport height or at least a fixed height like say 600px scaling.
P.s.2 if the only solution is js since we don't know the paragraph's and img's height at all times go ahead and propose a solution, I'm asking if this could be done with CSS since I'm not that good at js yet.
I would give the thanksup row an id - eg vertical and then you can use the following styles to achieve vertical alignment:
#vertical {
display:table;
width:100%;
}
#vertical > .columns {
float:none;
display:table-cell;
vertical-align:middle
}
#media (max-width: 565px) {
#vertical > .columns {
display: block;
}
Updated fiddle
This probably was answered somewhere, but I can't find it :s
My question is about dynamic resizing of divs based in percentages.
Please look at code example below for the examples and possible solutions I made.
I ask if there is a better way to do resizing?
More detailed explanation:
Say I am writing a plugin that people can insert in their pages. (Imagine login form).
I go ahead and design the plugin's divs. I use media queries to achieve desired look for different devices. I work on a div straight inside of a 'body' element.
I use percentages for design (I like percentages). Say I set div to 80% width.
Now I give this plugin to the user. User goes ahead and puts the plugin's div inside of another
div that is 100px in width. Now everything looks awful. (80% of 100px is not a lot [80px]).
And of course I want user to put my plugin inside of whatever small-width divs that he have.
The solutions I saw so far to this problem was to create a holder div of certain width - say hardcode 300px. (ex - jQuery UI's Datepicker div; Meteor's login widget div). And then code to it always knowing the 300px width that I set before is not going to change.
But I don't know how good of a solution this is.
Moreover if I decide to go with hard-coding width, my plugin would need width of ~ 1000px. Because I want div to resize with media queries.
And if I go with hard-coding width (say holder div of 1000px width) and put it on a page, the page will have horizontal scrolling. And you cannot simply hide holder div (parent div) and have child to show at the same time. So this requires setting position:relative for holder (parent) div, putting it outside of window, and use same for child div - position:relative with same offset in opposite direction of parent offset.
I hope I am being clear so far and have not confused you!
A code example to illustrate what I am talking about:
http://jsbin.com/ifawez/18/edit
#cimmanon's comment cleared things out for me.
The problem is with lack of HTML/CSS "tools" available at the moment. Since responsiveness came into play fairly recently there are not a lot of CSS-native tools to accommodate changes in dimensions.
For instance media-queries exclusively work with width of window/document and not of other elements such as divs.
The solution I currently employ is using Javascript to determine width of a div and resize accordingly.
What I resize is the number of columns I want to display (I use Multi-Column module as suggested by cimmanon) which is pretty stable on webkit browsers. Since it is all done in Javascript (and jQuery's Sizzle) I keep an array of sizes like so:
var widthArray = [
{min:0, max:250, columns:1, secondary:false},
{min:251, max:350, columns:1, secondary:true },
{min:351, max:479, columns:1, secondary:true },
//more div sizes
];
// more code here
$(element).css({
"column-count": object.columns,
"-moz-column-count": object.columns,
"-webkit-column-count": object.columns
});
This is sort of like media-queries, but allows to work with width of html elements, not screen size alone.
Additionally I follow the way jQuery UI displays its components: using position relative/absolute.
.outer_div {
position: relative;
}
.inner_div_with_elements {
position: absolute;
z-index: 1010;
width: 99%;
float: left;
overflow: hidden;
...
}
.inner_components_displayable {
position: relative;
display: block;
}
.inner_components_hidden {
display: none;
}
So in Summary:
Media queries alone work with size of screen, and resizing of any inner element can be done in percentages to the screen size. They can be of huge help, but you turn into making your components work either with percentages based off screen, or specifying something like min-height and !important (as suggested by #Octavian)
Javascript manipulation of elements is currently easier, but is a costlier alternative (jQuery SIzzle is pretty slow)
A lot of libraries (ex. jQuery UI) use Javascript together with position relative/absolute to make sure their components/plug-ins will work nicely on all users' screen sizes.
I ended up combining position with javascript to emulate media-queries and multi-column design at the same time for responsiveness.
Thanks everyone who participated!
If I am reading this correctly, the main issue here is that it can potentially become too small based on where the code is located.
So why not just add a min-width property with !important? That way you can still base the size off of the parent container, but be sure that it doesn't get too small and ugly.
Potentially, you could even have a script to base the width off of the parent div and the min-width off of the screen size.
I have some very simple sub-navigation that I'm trying to build across the top of the content area within my web site, but CSS doesn't seem to have any simple solutions for such a common problem: I want either 3 or 4 equally spaced DIVs across the top of the page.
1) e.g. 3 Variable-Width, Equally-Spaced DIVs
[[LEFT] [CENTER] [RIGHT]]
2) e.g. 4 Variable-Width, Equally-Spaced DIVs
[[LEFT] [LEFT CENTER] [RIGHT CENTER] [RIGHT]]
My solution for the first problem with only 3 DIVs was to float the left and right DIVs, and then assign an arbitrary size to the middle DIV and give it "margin: 0 auto". That's not really a solution, but assuming there are no changes to the navigation, it gives a rough approximation of what I want the results to be.
The solution I have for the second problem with 4 DIVs is to simply center a DIV in the same way as before, but then float two DIVs within that, e.g.
[[LEFT] [[LEFT CENTER] [RIGHT CENTER]] [RIGHT]]
But again, this requires applying an arbitrary size to the middle DIV for alignment, and if any language or image changes are made to the site, alignment values will have to be recalculated. As well, it's simply an over-complicated solution that requires merging structure with presentation.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
EDIT 07/20/2012 5:00PM
Alright, I put the "table-cell" solution into place using percents, but I encountered another issue within my slightly more complex implementation: the issue at hand is that each DIV I was referring to is actually a container for two more DIVs which are icon-label pairs, inlined either by float or by display:inline-block.
e.g. http://jsfiddle.net/c3yrm/1/
As you can see, the final element in the list is displayed improperly.
Any help is again greatly appreciated!
EDIT 07/20/2012 7:16PM
Final solution with arttronics' help: http://jsfiddle.net/CuQ7r/4/
Reference: jsFiddle Pure CSS Demo
The solution was to float the individual breadcrumbs while using a simple formula to determine the percentage of breadcrumb width based on the number total breadcrumbs.
You could use percentages, then it just comes down to simple math:
[[LEFT=22%]2% margin><2% margin[LEFT CENTER=22%]2% margin><2% margin[RIGHT CENTER=22%]2% margin><2% marginRIGHT=22%]]=100%/??px
You could then specify a width for its container and use
display:inline;
to keep them inline.
Note: If you use borders to see what the divs are doing that will add space unnaccounted for so you would need to reduce your elements width by 1% or so OR just change their background colors.
ol {
width: 400px;
/*width: 800px;*/
display: table;
table-layout: fixed; /* the magic dust that ensure equal width */
background: #ccc
}
ol > li {
display: table-cell;
border: 1px dashed red;
text-align: center
}
like here: http://jsfiddle.net/QzYAr/
One way I've found to do it is using flex boxes (or inline-flex).
Here is a great explanation and example of how it can be done.
I think in the future, flex boxes will be the superior way of handling this sort of thing, but until other browsers catch up with Mozilla's way of thinking for how to use the flex-basis attribute (with min-content, max-content, fit-content, etc. as values), these flex boxes will continue to be problematic for responsive designs. For example, occasionally the inner content (a_really_really_long_word) can't fit in the allotted space when the window is squished down, and so sometimes some things might not be visible off to the right of the screen if you're not careful.
I think perhaps if you make use of the flex-wrap property, you might be able to ensure everything fits. Here is another example of how this might be done (in Mozilla browsers anyway).
I tend to use flex boxes for letterheads or tables where the width is fairly fixed (not too small) because they usually space themselves nicely; I tend to use nested float and inline-block objects for websites where the content must squish down very small (as suggested in some of the other answers here).
I'm trying to make a HTML "showcase". I am thinking of using elements like this:
<div id="index-showcase-tabs">
<div id="index-showcase-tabslide">
<div class="index-showcase-tab" id="showcase-tab-1">Item1</div>
<div class="index-showcase-tab" id="showcase-tab-2">Item2</div>
...
<div class="index-showcase-tab" id="showcase-tab-N">ItemN</div>
</div>
</div>
The showcase items are floated left, and I don't know their precise width, nor the number of them.
Problem is: if the combined width of the items is bigger than the container (index-showcase-tabs), I don't want them to break line (which they do by default). I want them in one line, and I want to hide the overflow and then let the user scroll them with javascript (not by scrollbar...).
How would I do that?
PS: There's not much css for the items yet. I only gave the slider a specific heigth:
#index-showcase-tabslide
{
height: 34px;
}
Edit: Here you can see my problem.
Edit2: explaining more with a fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/TbSfj/19/
For this, you cannot use float: left. Instead use display: inline - this will have the same effect for what you want to accomplish, and it will not be constrained to the parent div in the DOM model.
check out this sexy control:
http://jsfiddle.net/SoonDead/U6QdQ/20/
this way made for my project, but I think it does what you want.
The tricks are:
Because you use a lot of characters that can "linebreak" and even forcefully disable linebreaks have different results in 1-2 browsers, I would recommend against it.
Instead make the overflowing width wide enough to hold all the elements easily, so if javascript is disabled it will not look ugly.
(I know that you are fine with jquery, so I use it within the example, also the outerWidth property in simple js has bugs in webkit (tends to be 0 in some cases).)
So you need to sum up the elements' outerWidth() and set the content holder's width, so you can use scrollLeft, and not overscroll.
There is no other trick, just a scrollTo function because calculating positions are not that trivial if you are new to jquery and you might want to use that.
I have been using a lot of position:relative; in my design, I just find it the easiest way to get everything where I need them to be.
However, the more items I add on my site (each one with their individual div) each one ends up further and further at the bottom of my page, so I have to manually position them higher.
This leaves a lot of empty space at the bottom, and I thought that adding height: 1000px; would limit the scrolling a bit, but this method doesn't seem to work.
I've even tried adding height: 1000px; to the wrapper and it's still not working.
How can I limit vertical scrolling, to the number of pixels I choose?
Thanks so much in advance.
Wait, so you are creating a div, using position relative to move the content of the div to the correct location, and the issue being that the div tag itself is still in the same place and creating a vertical scroll even though there is no content there?
If so you should look into floats.
Here are some tutorials.
Floatutorial
Learn CSS Positioning in Ten Steps
You can specify both the height and the overflow:
.someClass
{
height:1000px;
overflow:scroll;
}
The most common values for overflow are scroll, auto, and hidden.
To limit the distance someone can scroll, I think you'd need to use JavaScript. I'm not sure how, but I can't think of anything in CSS that would do that.
If you are looking to set when something should scroll instead of just be cut off or expand the tag, use overflow:auto;.