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
Related
I've made my own static website from scratch using html5 and css(3) only.But I have got 2 issues.
The first one is the white space between the top's menu and header's image bottom.I've tried everything.
Maybe the only solution for that is float:left; but then the image goes into the navigation tag or negative value on margin's property but I've heard that this technique is bad.
The second issue I'll display via image http://www.filedropper.com/discoversite that's my simple WebSite. I know my css is awful but I'm still a beginner. The second issue is here. http://postimg.org/image/5adp6379d/ . As you can see the text is going out of the box. (I am using % in css for more responsive). I will be glad if anyone can help me.
I can only have a guess for your first issue as I don't know the exact code for your website (create jsfiddle :D ). Try to apply vertical-align: bottom; or display: block; to your header image. Why? Because images are placed like text and some letters like g, j, q and p are going underneath the bottom level. Your browser will leave a tiny space for these letters. Also setting a min-width is a good solution like Kirk Logan said.
And for your second problem there are multiple solutions (depending on what you want):
You can handle your content with overflow: hidden; or overflow: scroll as Kirk Logan suggested. But this wouldn't make any sense in the case you have shown us in the picture.
Or (is a little more complex) you could remove the white borders on the left and right side (just when the screen is too small) in order to gain more space for the text. This can be done by:
#media only screen and (max-width: 768px) {
#BigBorder1 { border-width: 0px; }
#BigBorder2 { border-width: 0px; }
}
Everthing inside the outer brackets will only be applied when the screen's width is smaller than 768px. But to be honest this is usually done the other way round: When the screen is bigger than 768px then something happens. This simplification is only in order to make it easier for you.
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 a %-based grid with a fixed-width (for the moment). The code is based off of this css-tricks article: http://css-tricks.com/dont-overthink-it-grids/
Works great until I have a column that has multiple responsive images in it that are the same size and need to be stacked next to each other (floated). Because of padding issues and what-not, I can not get all three images to come out the same width and height, despite the fact that they start that way. The last one is always taller. Here is a codepen showing the issue: http://codepen.io/joshmath/pen/dEuIv
Any help with this would be really appreciated. I've run into this issue before and always just end up hacking my way through it on a case-by-case basis. Thanks!
For whatever reason, if you remove the padding-right: 0 style from the last element, it fixes the issue.
It looks like you're trying to add spacing between the elements using padding. What I tried instead using the Chrome dev tools was to use a margin instead of padding, and then slightly reducing the width of your elements to around 29.5%. That seemed to work.
just add the following to your css. set the size to whatever you like and all images within your grid will remain that size, if they need to grow / shrink use height/width percents instead.
.grid img
{
width: 350px;
height: 400px;
}
First up, for extreme clarity, here a JS fiddle demonstrating what I'm trying to achieve:
http://jsfiddle.net/bb_matt/VsH7X/
Here's the explanation - my rationale:
I'm creating a responsive site using the 1140 grid framework.
It's a fairly complex layout.
I've created a re-usable simple gallery class which can drop into any defined column size & using media queries, I apply relevant percentage widths to the li elements.
Each of the li elements has a right margin of 5%.
I'm using nth-child(xn+x) in the media queries to remove the right margin at the end of each row.
Everything works well - images resize as the layout resizes, the number of gallery items in a row work as I've defined based on percentages.
The only remaining issue to fix is to clear between rows.
I can't add additional html markup and I want to steer clear of overly complex jquery fixes.
I know of two ways to fix this, but I'm not keen on either of them.
First fix, simply using display: inline-block on the li elements, with a vertical align of top, would flow everything correctly... however, all the percentages get shot and the gallery items no longer neatly fit in the allocated space.
Second fix, give the list items a height. This is the route I will go down if necessary - it will require a different height depending on the resolution - no big deal, but not as neat.
I updated your fiddle here: http://jsfiddle.net/VsH7X/5/
I added a clear: left to the first item in each new row.
ul.gallery li:nth-child(5n+6) {
clear: left;
}
Keep in mind that the :nth-child pseudo class does not work in IE6-8, or FF3 and under.
I'm still relatively new to css positioning, but have read a few books and watched a few tutorials. I made some palettes over at colourLovers, and wanted to see how they would look when applied to a website as a color scheme. So, using the little coding knowledge I had, I created a page to demonstrate my color scheme. After a while, it became a sort of self-confidence boost, and I've gotten just about done with it when a little thing caught my attention.
I have a two-column layout - on the left, there is the navigation menu, with a header above and a content section to the right, all in their own divs. My question is this - when I scale the page (as in, make the window for viewing it smaller), the content section gets pushed so it wraps under the Div. The way I could fix this was to make an additional div with no bg color and make it as long as the content that contained the navigation div, so they would line up, but it doesn't fix it if you resize the window.
I'm sure there's an easy fix to this, but my limited knowledge doesn't yet know it. If it helps, I've attached an image file below of what the site looks like in my editor (Coda). I also provide a link to the code of that page of my site which I've uploaded to textsnip. You can find it here - http://textsnip.com/f434fd. I have added comments to mark the header, sidebar, and content sections as well. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!
The easiest solution is to use min-wdith on your container:
<div style="width: 90%; padding: 10px; margin:0 auto; min-width: 400px;">
This won't work on IE6, but will work on everything else. And, if you need IE6, then there are several workarounds that will solve it.
I would suggest you to use % value instead of px.
For example:
Header: 100%;
Nav: 20%;
Content: 80%;
Footer: 100%;
This way, if someone rize the window, it will always display perfect.
Use "float: right" on content DIV. And replace px width with %.
Check out this
You can use CSS Media Queries to adjust things as they get bigger and smaller. For instance, if you wrap your entire page with a div with an ID of wrapper (and use Simon Arnold's solution for the width of the individual elements), then you can do this:
#media (min-width:1200px) {
#wrapper {
width:1100px;
}
}
#media (max-width:1200px) {
#wrapper {
width:90%;
}
}
These set your wrapper to 90% if the screen size is less than 1200px, and 1100px if your screen is bigger than 1200px. Thus, if the browser is wider than 1200px then your page will stay the same size, and if it's smaller then it'll flow nicely.
#media (max-width:700px) {
#wrapper {
width:100%;
}
}
That one makes it wider when the browser gets smaller, and
#media (max-width:400px) {
#wrapper {
width:400px;
}
}
that one sets it to a fixed width when the browser gets really small. Those are really simple queries, if you're interested in learning more about media queries then here's a good place: http://css-tricks.com/6731-css-media-queries/
And of course, it wouldn't hurt to make the page flow between those transitions using CSS3 Transitions.
IE8 and below, unfortunately, do not support media queries. BUT you could read their browser type with PHP instead, and direct them to get a decent browser... It'd help make the web better. ;)