I want the child elements of a height:100%; container to apply height:100%;. This seems to fail when there is a doctype present.
If you use min-height:100%; for the parent, the child elements don't apply height:100%;.
If you use height:100%; the child elements get stretched, but will overflow the parent.
If you then try to use height:100%; on the parent and keep min-height:100%; on the children, the children won't stretch anymore.
Here's a little sample:
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>Oh Well</title>
<style>
html, body {
width: 100%;
height:100%;
background: white;
margin:0;
padding:0;
}
#min-h-100 {
background-color: #eee;
min-height: 100%;
}
#min-h-100 > div{
min-height: 100%;
}
#h-100 {
background-color: #ccc;
height: 100%;
}
#h-100 > div {
height: 100%;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div id="min-h-100">
<div>If this is heigher than the container, the container expands.</div>
<div>The child elements do not get 100% height.</div>
</div>
<div id="h-100">
<div>The child elements get 100% height.</div>
<div>But there will be an overflow.</div>
</div>
<div>THIS SHOULD BE PUSHED DOWN</div>
</body>
</html>
edit:
min-height doesn't inherit. #GCryrillus came up with the idea to apply display:table to the parent, which at least stretches the parent. #Volker E. created a codepen.
edit:
If you don't want to support IE≤8, you can set the child min-height:100vh; which will make it at least as high as the viewport.
I find this question interesting, especially case #2 with id="h-100" implying several height: 100% children on height: 100% parent.
I've come up with a Codepen including the different options.
To prevent a overflow on the second case, you could also use overflow: hidden, but that would be an information loss.
#GCyrillus said it right, use display: table; and display: table-row/table-cell; conformingly to the child divs.
#h-100-table {
background-color: #ddd;
display: table;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
#h-100-table > div {
display: table-row;
width: 100%;
}
#h-100-table > div > div { // you don't need to go for extra nesting, but it's clearer.
display: table-cell;
width: 100%;
}
The grand-children of #h-100-table are not essential, it's more for maintainability. You could go with table-row children only too.
If you don't want to support IE≤8, you can set the child min-height:100vh; which will make it at least as high as the viewport (so basically gives you the wanted effect). (seen here)
Related
My footer will not stick to the bottom of the page in the latest Firefox, while it works in Chrome and IE11. From what I can tell the min-height:100% for the wrapper has no effect in Firefox.
HTML
<div id = "wrapper">
<div id = "content">
</div>
<div id = "push">
</div>
</div>
<div id = "footer"></div>
CSS
#wrapper{
min-height: 100%;
height: auto !important;
height: 100%;
margin: 0 auto -235px;
}
#push{
height:235px;
}
#footer{
position:relative;
height:235px;
width:100%;
}
It's hard to say by the posted code but according to CSS level 2 spec:
10.7 Minimum and maximum heights: 'min-height' and 'max-height'
The percentage is calculated with respect to the height of the
generated box's containing block. If the height of the containing
block is not specified explicitly (i.e., it depends on content
height), and this element is not absolutely positioned, the percentage
value is treated as '0' (for 'min-height') or 'none' (for
'max-height').
Hence you should make sure that the parent of #wrapper has an explicit height. If the #wrapper is located in <body>, try specifying height: 100% on <body> and <html> elements as well:
html, body {
height: 100%;
}
Because a percentage value for height property is relative to the height of the generated box's containing block as well, in this case the <html>. Otherwise the value computes to auto.
In addition, using height: auto !important; and height: 100%; together doesn't make sense and they're pointless; So it's better to remove them.
#wrapper{
min-height: 100%;
margin: 0 auto -235px;
}
Finally if it didn't work, you could give the following approach a try:
Position footer at bottom of page having fixed header
Let's simplify what you have a little.
Your #push can be replaced with the pseudo element :after on your wrapper.
Remove the height on the wrap and avoid !important.
html,body needs to have a height of 100% in order for other elements to have percentage heights
Have an example!
HTML
<div class="wrap">
<!-- main content -->
</div>
<footer class="footer"></footer>
CSS
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
html, body {
height: 100%;
}
.wrap {
min-height: 100%;
margin-bottom: -235px;
}
.wrap:after {
content: "";
display: block;
}
.footer, .wrap:after {
height: 235px;
}
.footer {
background: #F00;
}
If you are trying to have your your footer stick to the bottom, use:
#footer{
position:fixed;
bottom:0;
height:235px;
width:100%;
}
I just tried it with your code and verified that it works on the latest firefox.
I have a document structure that maintains the header at the top of the page and the footer at the bottom. It's working well as long as the content in the middle is less than the height of the window. If the content is too long, the footer gets pushed further down the page and a full body scrollbar is displayed.
How can I get the scrollbar to be limited to the content DIV.
Note that the content of the header and footer are not fixed so I don't know the height of those elements and can't set the top position of the content element as a fixed value. I've added a show/hide feature in the example to demonstrate this.
I'm trying to resolve this in pure CSS (avoiding Javascript). I know that using javascript, I could monitor changes to window size and element visibility, I could calculate the height of the header and footer and set fixed dimensions to the content element. But is there a non-javascript solution?
http://jsfiddle.net/sA5fD/1/
html { height: 100%; }
body {
padding:0 0;
margin:0 0;
height: 100%;
}
#main {
display:table;
height:100%;
width:100%;
}
#header, #footer {
display:table-row;
background:#88f;
}
#more {
display: none;
}
#content {
display:table-row;
height:100%;
background:#8f8;
}
It should work for all modern browsers, desktop, tablets and mobiles. For old browsers, a full body scrollbar would be ok.
If you add two wrap blocks:
<div id="content">
<div id="content-scroll-wrap">
<div id="content-scroll">
content...
Then use CSS:
#content-scroll-wrap {
position: relative;
height: 100%;
}
#content-scroll {
position: absolute;
top: 0; bottom: 0;
left: 0; right: 0;
overflow: auto;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/sA5fD/8/
Don't know about support in old browsers. IEs might need some fixes.
For future visitors:
HTML
<div class="parent">
<div class="child">
<div class="large-element> </div>
</div>
</div>
CSS
.parent {
height: 1000px
overflow-y: scroll;
}
.child {
background-color: royalblue;
height: auto;
}
.large-element {
height: 1200px;
}
In this scenario, the child element will create an overflow. Since the child's height is set to auto, it will stretch out to fill the container. If you had set it to 100%, it would only go 1000px, leaving some white space beneath!
Here is a pen: https://codepen.io/meteora/pen/JJYoZM
This should work in all browsers :)
I have 3 divs in a parent div which looks like this:
<div id="maincontent>
<div class="left"></div>
<div class="mainbody"></div>
<div class="right"></div>
</div>
The website is 1000px wide.
What I need is to keep the .mainbody div at a minimum of 570px, but have it expand if one of the other 2 divs is removed from the page, which are each given 215px width.
All 3 divs are also floated left.
I tried using min-width and max-width on .mainbody but it doesn't really work. Any other ideas?
My current CSS:
#maincontent {
width: 100%;
overflow: hidden;
}
.left, .right, .mainbody {
float: left;
}
.left, .right {
width: 215px;
}
.mainbody {
width: 570px;
}
CSS Only Solution 1
This assumes the question was accurate in stating "if one of the other 2 divs is removed from the page."
See this fiddle which uses the following code, the key part of which is the :first-child and :last-child change based off your html structure change that you mention. When the left is deleted, the mainbody becomes the first-child and when the right is deleted the mainbody becomes the last-child, so you reset the width if such occurs.
Key CSS
.mainbody {
width: 570px;
float: left;
}
.mainbody:first-child,
.mainbody:last-child {
width: 785px;
}
.left,
.right {
width: 215px;
float: left;
}
CSS Only Solution 2
This accounts for the div remaining, but having no content and being zero width (which is apparently what the situation actually is).
There is a CSS only solution (see this fiddle), but it requires one to restructure the HTML order of the elements and to adjust how they are floated.
Needed HTML Structure (mainbody is last)
<div id="maincontent1">
<div class="left"></div>
<div class="right"></div>
<div class="mainbody"></div>
</div>
Key CSS
.mainbody {
min-width: 570px;
overflow: hidden; /* this triggers expansion between left/right */
}
.left {
width: 215px; /* this is assumed to be zero if no content in div */
float: left;
}
.right {
width: 215px; /* this is assumed to be zero if no content in div */
float: right;
}
Just ad and event to the function. .click(), .ready() etc
if($('.right').is(':visible') == false){
$('.mainbody').width(785+'px');
}
else{ }
or use .size() / .length()
I've been searching for hours but I can't find a way to place 2 div's next to each other.
The below example works fine when the div's are smaller then the screen but when they are bigger then the screen they are below each other.
Also I would like the same classes for 2 pages:
1 page they both fit on the screen and I'd like to display them next to each other (not one on the left and one on the right)
the other page together they are bigger then the screen. (Sideways scrolling is no problem)
Take this example:
<style>
.wrapper
{
border:1px solid Red;
display: inline-block;
}
.left
{
float:left;
color: Green;
border:1px solid Green;
}
.right
{
float:right;
color: Blue;
border:1px solid Blue;
}
</style>
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="left">
ASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDF
</div>
<div class="right">
ASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDF
</div>
<div class="clear" />
</div>
In the actual design ASDF is replaced by a big <table>.
As I said above I've been searching for hours but can find a solution so I'm sorry if this has been asked before.
The wrapper div isn't necessary for the two to be lined up, but if you have it for other reasons (like a border, background, etc.), then it does not need to be set to inline-block.
Nothing technically needs to float. inline-block has the same effect and is more appropriate. Having said that, one float is needed to make things as fluid as possible and will be mentioned in a second.
Something that makes this and other css magic involving inline-block tricky and error-prone is that the element is treated in some ways like an inline element and in other ways like a block. This is not cross-browser consistent. Generally, this means that it can have block-level styling (like border, and width), and inline-level styling. Generally people just think of it as blocks that fall horizontally, "in a line". But inline element properties from a wrapper div such as font-size and white-space come in to effect as well (which is just annoying).
Having said all of that, here is the bare-bones recipe for side-by-side block elements that exceed the browser window and are inside of a block-level wrapper:
The inner blocks need to be set to inline-block.
The outer wrapper needs to have white-space set to nowrap, just as if you wanted a long line of text to expand horizontally beyond the browser window.
The outer wrapper needs to be set to float: left; clear: both;, because otherwise the wrapper's width will not go past the window width. The alternative is to set the width of the wrapper, but if you don't know how far it will expand, the float will force the wrapper to automatically shrink or grow to the width of it's contents. The clear:both prevents the floating from affecting any surrounding elements.
So for the following HTML:
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="left">ASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDF</div>
<div class="right">ASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDF</div>
</div>
You would need the following CSS as a bare minimum:
.wrapper {
white-space: nowrap;
float:left;
clear: both;
}
.left, .right{
display: inline-block;
}
And then, for your example, you would add:
.wrapper {
border: 1px solid red;
}
.left
{
color: Green;
border:1px solid Green;
}
.right
{
color: Blue;
border:1px solid Blue;
}
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/crazytonyi/jTknm/
This is one approach that could be used, coupling white-space: nowrap in the parent .wrapper element with display: inline-block in the child .left and .right elements:
.wrapper
{
/* other stuff */
white-space: nowrap;
}
.left
{
display: inline-block;
/* other stuff */
}
.right
{
display: inline-block;
/* other stuff */
}
JS Fiddle demo.
You can do this without floating by setting the inner divs to display: inline-block and letting the outer div have white-space: nowrap:
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="left">left</div><div class="right">right</div>
</div>
.wrapper { border: 1px red solid; white-space: nowrap }
.wrapper div { display: inline-block; width: 70% } /* 2*70% = 140% of .wrapper */
See it in action.
Be careful to not leave any whitespace between closing the first and opening the second div, because that will manifest as visible space in the render.
Erm, you need to use float:left for both them to begin with. Then force overflow:show for the wrapper or perhaps use the newer CSS 3 property overflow-x:scroll. Let me know if it still doesn't work.
Okay I have tested for you. The reason why this is not working is because you haven't specified fixed widths and some other stuff. Here is the working code:
<style>
.wrapper
{
border:1px solid Red;
width:100%;
overflow-x:scroll;
}
.left
{
float:left;
width:500px;
color: Green;
border:1px solid Green;
}
.right
{
float:left;
width:500px;
color: Blue;
border:1px solid Blue;
}
</style>
<body>
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="left">
ASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDF
</div>
<div class="right">
ASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDFASDF
</div>
<div class="clear" />
</div>
Then if you want to specify widths, either use Javascript to determine them on page load or use CSS.
Your divs need widths, try:
<div id="left"><p>Some content here...</p></div>
<div id="right"><p>Some content here...</p></div>
<style>
#left, #right { float:left; color: Green; border:1px solid Green; width:49%; }
#left { margin-right:1%; }
</style>
I have some HTML+CSS code that wants to layout several divs. The layout is like this: all divs stay in a parent div whose size is fixed. Then each child div should stay on its own line, and use the minimum height for drawing its content. The last div should consume all remaining height, so that the parent div is entirely filled.
This code shows my approach using CSS float and clear properties:
<html>
<head>
<style>
.container {
width: 500px;
height: 500px;
border: 3px solid black;
}
.top {
background-color: yellow;
float: left;
clear: left;
width: 100%;
}
.bottom {
background-color: blue;
height: 100%;
float: left;
clear: left;
width: 100%;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div class="container">
<div class="top">top1</div>
<div class="top">top2</div>
<div class="top">top3</div>
<div class="top">top4</div>
<div class="bottom">bottom</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
However, the last div overflows from the its parent. I guess it is because of the width: 100%.
Is there any way to solve this problem? I want to avoid setting the overflow attribute of the parent, and also I have to avoid using absolute positioning. If somehow I could trick the last div to use the height of the parent minus the sum of height of the other divs.
Add:
div.container { overflow: hidden; }
It's not overflowing because it's 100% width. It's overflowing because it's a float and thus removed from the normal layout. Changing the overflow property will change how the browser caters for contained floats.
Oh and if you aren't already, make sure you're using a DOCTYPE. It particularly matters for IE.