The div tags are nested as
<div class="Site-wrapper" id="Site-wrapper">
<div id="Main-Menu-mobile" class="Main-Menu-mobile">
<div class="Site">
</div>
</div>
</div>
The logic for the menu is just these 4 CSS classes
.Site-wrapper {
position: relative;
width: 100%;
overflow: hidden;
}
.nav-open .Site {
left: auto;
transform: translate3d(70%, 0, 0);
}
.Site {
position: relative;
left: 0;
min-height: 100%;
background-color: #e4e4e4;
transition: 0.2s ease all;
}
.Main-Menu-mobile {
width: 70%;
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: 0;
padding: 15px;
}
https://codepen.io/taufeq-orangejulius-razakh/pen/dypgjNO
Your Site-Wrapper div (The parent one) only has a height of 41px. And this stays the same even when the toggler button translates to right. This is where the implementation is a bit off.
Try removing your overflow:hidden from .Site-wrapper
.Site-wrapper {
position: relative;
width: 100%;
/* overflow: hidden; This needs to be implemented well*/
}
What you can do, is once the Hamburger icon is clicked change the overflow property value in Javascript.
I have the css transition working when the user hovers over item however when the mouse exits the div, content is pushed below during the transition. Below is my html/css along with a jsfiddle to show what I mean.
html:
<div id="container">
<div class="item">
<div class="img">
</div>
<div class="heading">
</div>
</div>
</div>
css:
#container {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.item {
width: 100%;
height: 400px;
position: relative;
}
.img {
background: #000;
width: 40%;
height: 400px;
float: left;
transition: width 0.5s ease;
}
.heading {
width: 60%;
height: 400px;
float: right;
background: #900;
transition: width 0.5s ease;
}
.item:hover .img {
width: 100%;
}
.item:hover .heading {
width: 100%;
background:rgba(255,255,255, 0.9);
position: absolute;
top:0;
left:0;
}
JSFiddle
I am sure it is a simple position problem. However, I am not familiar enough with the transition to know where to find the answer.
Updated position to
tranform: translateY(-100%);
in order to get rid of the non-transition property. Now before/after :hover the div heading gets pushed below item. Updated JSFiddle to show.
Updated transition: all to transition: width on both img and heading which fixed heading getting pushed below img on :hover, however the original problem of heading being pushed below when user exits :hover is still an issue.
I think I found the answer:
by making heading have position:absolute;, I can have it forced to stay inside of the item div, keeping it from moving below it. So my updated css (with actual class names and production stuff) looks like;
.flight {
height: 400px;
position: relative;
}
.flight-img {
background: red;
background-size: cover;
width: 40%;
height: 400px;
float: left;
position: relative;
/* CSS Animation Effects */
transition: width 0.5s ease;
}
.flight-heading {
width: 60%;
float: left;
position: absolute;
top: 50%;
right: 0;
transform: translateY(-50%);
transition: width 0.5s ease;
}
/* Alternate img float ***
/* Probably an easier way but this works for now */
.flight:nth-of-type(4n-1) .flight-img{
float: right;
}
.flight:nth-of-type(4n-3) .flight-img{
float: left;
}
.flight:nth-of-type(4n-1) .flight-heading{
left:0;
}
.flight:nth-of-type(4n-3) .flight-heading{
float: right;
}
/* Adding hover effects for desktop */
.flight:hover .flight-img {
width: 100%;
}
.flight:hover .flight-heading {
width: 100%;
position:absolute;
top:0;
left:0;
transform: translateY(50%);
background: rgba(0,0,0,0.75);
color: #fff;
h2 {
color: #fff;
}
}
while my html looks like:
<div id="flights">
<div class="flight">
<div class="flight-img"></div>
<div class="flight-heading">
<h2>Shared Flights</h2>
<p>The shared flight option is available for 1 to 5 people. This is our most economical flight. You will fly with other passengers that are booked that day.</p>
<button>Book Now</button>
</div>
</div>
<div class="clear"></div>
</div><!-- End Flights -->
with a JSFiddle to show. I know the animation needs work, but I figure making it smooth will be easy now that the divs stay in one place.
Here is the code. I want the DIV.fixed-nav (position:fixed) to completely fit its parent DIV.container of which width may change. Is there a pure CSS solution for this?
CSS:
body {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
.container {
border: 1px solid #000000;
margin: 0 auto;
max-width: 600px;
min-width: 400px;
}
.fixed-nav {
background-color: red;
height: 20px;
position: fixed;
width: 100%;
top: 0;
z-index: 99;
}
.content {
background-color: green;
height: 100px;
margin-top: 20px;
}
HTML:
<div class="container">
<div class="fixed-nav">
</div>
<div class="content">
</div>
</div>
Please check the DEMO.
The problem with fixed is that it will always be relative to the browser window. So if you set 100% height on your fixed container it will be 100% of the browser window.
The only way I could think of to achieve this is to use jQuery. Or if you don't need the menu to be fixed and it could be absolute then height 100% will work.
Here's my working example:
http://jsfiddle.net/UGhKe/2/
CSS
#body {
height: 200px;
background: black;
width: 100%;
}
.header {
position: fixed;
top: 0;
background: #369;
z-index: 1;
width: 100%;
height: 5em;
}
.content {
position: absolute;
top: 5em;
overflow: hidden;
height: 1000px;
background: #936;
z-index: 0;
width: 100%;
}
.footer {
position: fixed;
bottom: 0;
background: #396;
width: 100%;
}
.large {
font-size: 120%;
padding: 2em;
}
HTML
<div id="body">
<div class="header">
<div class="large">Header</div>
</div>
<div class="content">
Content, you should be able to see this when you scroll to top.
</div>
<div class="footer">
<div class="large">Footer</div>
</div>
</div>
I want the content to be positioned below the header when you scroll the top (but hidden when you scroll down, under header) - this works fine...
However I need to remove top: 5em and use something like "inherit the current height of the header" - is it possible without JS?
If it's really not possible without JS, then I can just use JS but I'd rather try and find a solution in pure CSS.
EDIT:
I should note that the reason I can't use top: 5em is because the header will not have a fixed height - an image (for a logo) will be used inside of the text, and that would be set to max-width: 100% so that it shrinks to right width for an iPhone and doesn't expand too much on say an iPad.
See if thats work for you. http://jsfiddle.net/UGhKe/3/
I added another div with the same height but "non-fixed" to simulate your fixed header.
HTML
<div id="body">
<div id="blockHeader"></div>
<div class="header">
<div class="large">Header</div>
</div>
<div class="content">
Content, you should be able to see this when you scroll to top.
</div>
<div class="footer">
<div class="large">Footer</div>
</div>
</div>
CSS
html, body { margin:0; padding:0; }
#blockHeader
{
width:100%;
height: 5em;
}
.content {
position: absolute;
overflow: hidden;
height: 1000px;
background: #936;
z-index: 0;
width: 100%;
}
You can do it using variables(Use SASS or LESS for that). Take a look at the pen.
CODE:
$headerContentVariable: 5em;
#body {
height: 200px;
background: black;
width: 100%;
}
.header {
position: fixed;
top: 0;
background: #369;
z-index: 1;
width: 100%;
height: $headerContentVariable;
}
.content {
position: absolute;
top: $headerContentVariable;
overflow: hidden;
height: 1000px;
background: #936;
z-index: 0;
width: 100%;
}
.footer {
position: fixed;
bottom: 0;
background: #396;
width: 100%;
}
.large {
font-size: 120%;
padding: 2em;
}
I'm trying to understand what appears to be unexpected behaviour to me:
I have an element with a max-height of 100% inside a container that also uses a max-height but, unexpectedly, the child overflows the parent:
.container {
background: blue;
padding: 10px;
max-height: 200px;
max-width: 200px;
}
img {
display: block;
max-height: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
}
<div class="container">
<img src="http://placekitten.com/400/500" />
</div>
This is fixed, however, if the parent is given an explicit height:
.container {
background: blue;
padding: 10px;
max-height: 200px;
max-width: 200px;
height: 200px;
}
img {
display: block;
max-height: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
}
<div class="container">
<img src="http://placekitten.com/400/500" />
</div>
Does anyone know why the child would not honour the max-height of its parent in the first example? Why is an explicit height required?
When you specify a percentage for max-height on a child, it is a percentage of the parent's actual height, not the parent's max-height, oddly enough. The same applies to max-width.
So, when you don't specify an explicit height on the parent, then there's no base height for the child's max-height to be calculated from, so max-height computes to none, allowing the child to be as tall as possible. The only other constraint acting on the child now is the max-width of its parent, and since the image itself is taller than it is wide, it overflows the container's height downwards, in order to maintain its aspect ratio while still being as large as possible overall.
When you do specify an explicit height for the parent, then the child knows it has to be at most 100% of that explicit height. That allows it to be constrained to the parent's height (while still maintaining its aspect ratio).
.container {
background: blue;
padding: 10px;
max-height: 200px;
max-width: 200px;
float: left;
margin-right: 20px;
}
.img1 {
display: block;
max-height: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
}
.img2 {
display: block;
max-height: inherit;
max-width: inherit;
}
<!-- example 1 -->
<div class="container">
<img class='img1' src="http://via.placeholder.com/350x450" />
</div>
<!-- example 2 -->
<div class="container">
<img class='img2' src="http://via.placeholder.com/350x450" />
</div>
I played around a little. On a larger image in firefox, I got a good result with using the inherit property value. Will this help you?
.container {
background: blue;
padding: 10px;
max-height: 100px;
max-width: 100px;
text-align:center;
}
img {
max-height: inherit;
max-width: inherit;
}
Instead of going with max-height: 100%/100%, an alternative approach of filling up all the space would be using position: absolute with top/bottom/left/right set to 0.
In other words, the HTML would look like the following:
<div class="flex-content">
<div class="scrollable-content-wrapper">
<div class="scrollable-content">
1, 2, 3
</div>
</div>
</div>
.flex-content {
flex-grow: 1;
position: relative;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.scrollable-content-wrapper {
position: absolute;
left: 0;
right: 0;
top: 0;
bottom: 0;
overflow: auto;
}
.scrollable-content {
/* Add styling here */
}
Try it below:
.flex-content {
flex-grow: 1;
position: relative;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.scrollable-content-wrapper {
position: absolute;
left: 0;
right: 0;
top: 0;
bottom: 0;
overflow: auto;
}
html {
height: 50%;
width: 50%;
}
body {
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
}
.parent {
height: 100%;
outline: 1px solid red;
}
<html>
<body>
<div class="parent">
<div class="flex-content">
<div class="scrollable-content-wrapper">
<div class="scrollable-content" id="scrollable">
1, 2, 3
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<button onClick="scrollable.innerText += '\nSome more text'" style="margin-top: 1rem;">Add Line</button>
<p>
The red outline represents the parent. Click above to add a line until overflow occurs to see that the size of the parent is not increased.
</p>
</body>
</html>
I found a solution here:
http://www.sitepoint.com/maintain-image-aspect-ratios-responsive-web-design/
The trick is possible because it exists a relation between WIDTH and PADDING-BOTTOM of an element. So:
parent:
container {
height: 0;
padding-bottom: 66%; /* for a 4:3 container size */
}
child (remove all css related to width, i.e. width:100%):
img {
max-height: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
position: absolute;
display:block;
margin:0 auto; /* center */
left:0; /* center */
right:0; /* center */
}
You can use the property object-fit
.cover {
object-fit: cover;
width: 150px;
height: 100px;
}
Like suggested here
A full explanation of this property by Chris Mills in Dev.Opera
And an even better one in CSS-Tricks
It's supported in
Chrome 31+
Safari 7.1+
Firefox 36+
Opera 26+
Android 4.4.4+
iOS 8+
I just checked that vivaldi and chromium support it as well (no surprise here)
It's currently not supported on IE, but... who cares ? Also, iOS supports object-fit, but not object-position, but it will soon.
Here is a solution for a recently opened question marked as a duplicate of this question. The <img> tag was exceeding the max-height of the parent <div>.
Broken: Fiddle
Working: Fiddle
In this case, adding display:flex to the 2 parent <div> tags was the answer
Maybe someone else can explain the reasons behind your problem but you can solve it by specifying the height of the container and then setting the height of the image to be 100%. It is important that the width of the image appears before the height.
<html>
<head>
<style>
.container {
background: blue;
padding: 10px;
height: 100%;
max-height: 200px;
max-width: 300px;
}
.container img {
width: 100%;
height: 100%
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div class="container">
<img src="http://placekitten.com/400/500" />
</div>
</body>
</html>
The closest I can get to this is this example:
http://jsfiddle.net/YRFJQ/1/
or
.container {
background: blue;
border: 10px solid blue;
max-height: 200px;
max-width: 200px;
overflow:hidden;
box-sizing:border-box;
}
img {
display: block;
max-height: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
}
The main problem is that the height takes the percentage of the containers height, so it is looking for an explicitly set height in the parent container, not it's max-height.
The only way round this to some extent I can see is the fiddle above where you can hide the overflow, but then the padding still acts as visible space for the image to flow into, and so replacing with a solid border works instead (and then adding border-box to make it 200px if that's the width you need)
Not sure if this would fit with what you need it for, but the best I can seem to get to.
A good solution is to not use height on the parent and use it just on the child with View Port :
Fiddle Example: https://jsfiddle.net/voan3v13/1/
body, html {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.parent {
width: 400px;
background: green;
}
.child {
max-height: 40vh;
background: blue;
overflow-y: scroll;
}
Containers will already generally wrap their content nicely. It often doesn't work as well the other way around: children don't fill their ancestors nicely. So, set your width/height values on the inner-most element rather than the outer-most element, and let the outer elements wrap their contents.
.container {
background: blue;
padding: 10px;
}
img {
display: block;
max-height: 200px;
max-width: 200px;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/mpalpha/71Lhcb5q/
.container {
display: flex;
background: blue;
padding: 10px;
max-height: 200px;
max-width: 200px;
}
img {
object-fit: contain;
max-height: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
}
<div class="container">
<img src="http://placekitten.com/400/500" />
</div>