Are there any hacks for max-width:-webkit-fit-content; for ie 8?
Trying to get a child div to not take up the whole width of the parent and this works well with ff, chrome and safari; hoping there's some hack to get it to work with ie 8 as well.
Fiddle showing the behavior: http://jsfiddle.net/XtZq9/
Code for the behavior I want in ie8:
#wrap {
background-color: aqua;
width:300px;
height: 50px;
padding-top: 1px;
}
.textbox {
background-color: yellow;
max-width: intrinsic;
max-width:-webkit-fit-content;
max-width: -moz-max-content;
margin-top: 2px;
}
<div id="wrap">
<div class="textbox">
Here is some text
</div>
<div class="textbox">
Here is other, longer, text
</div>
</div>
From demosthenes.info, I learned I can simply use
display: table;
instead of
width: fit-content;
Check the link however about problems with whitespaces. It does not apply to my case, and simply replacing width: fit-content with display: table solved my problem quite easily.
The closest I can think of is floating your elements. Not exactly alike, but probably sufficiently alike;) You need to set extra margin though, but this should be no problem with a conditional stylesheet.
.textbox {
background-color: yellow;
float:left;
clear:left;
}
Your modified fiddle
It might depends on the situation:
I had a block-level element with width: fit-content;. As this doesn't work on IE, the element was taking the full available width (as expected).
But I wanted it to just adjust its size to its content.
Finally, i fixed it with:
display: inline-flex;
Not yet; keep watching http://caniuse.com/#feat=intrinsic-width &
https://wpdev.uservoice.com/forums/257854-internet-explorer-platform/suggestions/6263702-css-intrinsic-sizing
Related
I've run into a bit of a snag whilst developing the frontend for a website. I'm competent with CSS, but not fantastic. Anyway, I've created a jsFiddle here that illustrates my problem.
On each page of my website, at the top of the content section, I have a banner image. I wish to put a two colour divider seperating this banner from the content. (As is shown in the mockup my designer gave me: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d9opotyiyp0yc9o/menus.jpg)
I'd like to do this in pure CSS+HTML, without just chucking an image in. Anyway, I've done so using the following code:
<img class="banner" src="http://regency.ymindustries.com/static/images/winelist.jpg" style="width: 100%;">
<div>
<div style="width:30%; height: 10px; display: inline-block; background: #6C210C"></div><div style="width:70%; height:10px; display: inline-block; background: #E5C697;"></div>
</div>
(Please forgive the inline CSS, it's just for demonstration purposes. Also, unfortunately, if I put the second div on a newline and indent it, it creates whitespace)
The issue I'm having is that there is a large gap between the divider and the image. I have tried adding margin: 0px and padding: 0px to all the relevant elements, and the whitespace is still there.
Could someone help me out please?
Thanks,
YM
To me it's a vertical alignment issue. You can try
.banner {
display: block;
width: 100%;
}
div {
height: 10px;
vertical-align: top;
}
That way you don't have to use negative margins (which aren't wrong, just controversial practice).
Check it out here
you can make the position relative and then set the top to something minus. ex:
position: relative;
top:-10px;
left:0px;
this is actually float problem
<img class="banner" src="http://regency.ymindustries.com/static/images/winelist.jpg">
<div style="">
<div style="float:left;width:30%; height: 10px; display: inline-block; background: #6C210C"></div><div style="width:70%;float:left; height:10px; display: inline-block; background: #E5C697;"></div>
</div>
css
.banner {
width:100%;
float:left;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/eLbUU/4/
using display block and floating the divs, also making sure the img itself is display block with overflow hidden I was able to tighten up the stripes to the img : fiddle
.banner {
width:100%;
display: block;
overflow: hidden;
}
div div{
float: left;
}
First of all, put the darker brown in the lighter brown div. That way, when the window is re-sized, you don't compromise the sizing percentage and/or spacing.
<div style="width:100%; height:10px; display: inline-block; background: #E5C697;"> <div style="width:30%; height: 10px; background: #6C210C;"></div></div>
And with the space, you can either use negative margins or floats like others have mentioned.
.banner {
width:100%;
/* margin-bottom to the banner is negative which moves the div upward */
margin-bottom: -10px;
}
fiddle here
Putting display: block; for the image class and float:left; for all other elements may help.
.banner {
width:100%;
display:block;
float:left;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/bjliu/eLbUU/7/ (Edit: Sorry Wrong Link)
I have a really simple example which I've written on JSBin. It looks like this:
All I'd like to do is simply take two divs of a given width and height and display them side-by-side without a gap between them. I've used display: inline-block to accomplish the above, but it seems like it refuses to chomp the whitespace between divs, which seems to completely violate the idea of the separation of content and styling.
Here's my HTML:
<div class="container">
<div class="a">
<!-- completely empty -->
</div>
<div class="b">
<!-- nothing at all -->
</div>
</div>
and here's my CSS:
.container {
display: inline-block;
}
.a {
width: 320px;
height: 240px;
display: inline-block;
background-color: #83C5D1;
}
.b {
width: 180px;
height: 240px;
display: inline-block;
background-color: #B2D9D6;
}
How can I work around this to get them snug together without touching my HTML?
Add float:left to both of the divs classes .a and .b
I upated your JSBin http://jsbin.com/iwihox/4/edit
You're using a tabular design. Go for broke!
.container {
display: table-row;
}
.container > * {
display: table-cell;
}
Edit: Firefox did not like the inline-block children.
QUICK FIX
All given answers are good solutions, however the main reason for the gap is that there is white-space characters in your actual HTML that gets rendered. If you remove the space between both divs:
..</div><div>..
That will fix your current problem.
Heres the JSBIN: http://jsbin.com/iwihox/10/edit
THE PROPER SOLUTION:
The proper way to do this, is add float:left to both classes .a and .b. Making them float does change the box-model, so depending on your surrounding markup, you will need to add clear:both to the next tag in your HTML to have the document properly flowing.
CHECK THIS FIDDLE: http://jsbin.com/iwihox/19/edit
Let me know, Thanks!
I'm new to CSS tables, it's my first time. So I discovered that when you set display:table to a div, you can forgot all margin and padding (and whatever) you're planning on it's future cause they are ignored. Nice. The only property I've found to make this job is border-spacing but it is a little limited comparing with margin and padding. It have only two ways of styling, horizontal and vertical. You can't set the value of the side you want like border-spacing-left or border-spacing: 0 1px 2px 3px.
In my case, I have a table with one row that lies on the top right corner of the screen. I want it attached on the very top and spaced horizontally, which caused me problems. The top is okay but the right detaches from the border when I use border-spacing: 10px 0.
Smart guys like me don't see this as a problem, cause we can set it margin-right negatively, making it be attached again on the right side of the browser. Wow, whata smart ass I am!
However, I saw an little damn scrollbar on the bottom of the screen like a roach under your cooker at the kitchen. I hate roac.. scrollbars specially horizontals, so I got my inseticide called overflow-x and kil.. set it to hidden. She run desperately and dissapeared, but I know that she's there, somewhere staring at me. And this is driving me crazy.
Seriously now. I think this isn't the right way to do that and I hope somebody can teach me how to do it.
This is my scenario on Fiddle
Thank you in advance(mainly for reading this crap).
There are a few ways of achieving what you're trying to achieve. Most commonly, using display: table, display: table-cell, etc isn't very high on the list.
So, here's how I would do it: http://jsfiddle.net/VKnQZ/1/
Do bear in mind that I don't know the full circumstance of what you're attempting so it may well be that I'm missing a (valid) reason that you're using table display properties in the first place.
You'll notice a few things here:
I've done away with your table display properties. I don't think you need them, and floats do the job just fine (just remember to clear them).
I've removed your display from the cell divs. As someone in the comments above pointed out, divs inherit display: block by default. The additional dimensions set their size as you already had it.
I'm using the + selector to put in the spacing between elements. In this instance div + div is essentially short-hand for 'every div which is beside another div' - so all of them aside from the first.
Hopefully that achieves what you're aiming for and does away with all the nasty hacky overflow/margins/etc.
Here's the code:
HTML (only change is to remove the row div):
<div id="nav">
<div class="red"></div>
<div class="green"></div>
<div class="blue"></div>
</div>
CSS:
body {
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
}
#nav {
float: right;
}
#nav div {
float: left;
width: 120px;
height: 40px;
}
#nav div + div{
margin-left: 10px;
}
.red { background-color:#f00 }
.green { background-color:#0f0 }
.blue { background-color:#00f }
and can you tell me why are you trying to imitate table behavior when you have "table" tag? it could be styled pretty well also
what you are doing is sometimes called "divitis"
edit:
you can position table absolutely http://jsfiddle.net/n83kT/
Not too sure if this the right place to discuss float and display :)
But , flex is on his way, and display is already quiet efficient.
Display + direction and you could kick floats away.
border-spacing version : http://jsfiddle.net/GCyrillus/2EZ3F/
border-left version : http://jsfiddle.net/GCyrillus/2EZ3F/1/
<section>
<div id="nav">
<div class="red"></div>
<div class="green"></div>
<div class="blue"></div>
</div>
</section>
section is to set direction .. or not
unset & reset direction to fake float ,
else use text-align if you dislike this method.
In CSSheet, notice inline-table instead of table so it reacts to text-align and or direction (not all pages are EN or FR :) )
body {
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
}
section {
direction:rtl; /* unset regular if you wish, else text-align will do for inline-boxes */
}
#nav {
direction:ltr;/* reset/set here if you want cells from left to right */
display:inline-table;
border-spacing: 10px 0 ;
}
#nav div {
/*direction:ltr; reset here if you want cells from right to left */
display: table-cell;
width: 120px;
height: 40px;
}
#nav div + div {
margin-left: 10px;
}
.red {
background-color:#f00
}
.green {
background-color:#0f0
}
.blue {
background-color:#00f
}
My 2 (late) cents for a different point of view :)
For completeness, I would like to offer the case for the often overlooked inline-block display type.
Similar to the use of floats, the HTML is as follows:
<div id="nav">
<div class="red"></div>
<div class="green"></div>
<div class="blue"></div>
</div>
and the CSS:
#nav {
position:absolute;
top:0;
right:0;
}
#nav div {
width: 120px;
height: 40px;
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: bottom;
}
#nav div + div {
margin-left: 10px;
}
This inline-block approach behaves similarly to the floated-child-div's approach.
In this application, I can't think of a reason to use one over the other.
One minor consideration is that inline-block is not supported in some older browsers.
Otherwise, both approaches use the same mark-up and the CSS rules are similarly simple.
The choice may depend a lot on the content that you use in the #nav div elements.
Demo fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/audetwebdesign/EVJPN/
I was wondering if there were any simple examples that did the following
* A right and a left fixed column with a fluid center.
With full height and width and a header and footer.
* A single left fixed column with a fluid content column 2.
With full height and width and a header and footer.
* A single right fixed column with a fluid content column.
With Full height and width and a header and footer.
I've tried some methods (such as the ones listed on listapart) but they seemed really complicated and they used a lot of divs, or they just didn't support padding.
Thanks in advance
Check this site out:
http://matthewjamestaylor.com/blog/perfect-stacked-columns.htm
Other layout examples from the above:
http://matthewjamestaylor.com/blog/perfect-2-column-left-menu.htm
http://matthewjamestaylor.com/blog/perfect-2-column-right-menu.htm
http://matthewjamestaylor.com/blog/perfect-3-column.htm
The examples you found in alistapart.com are as complicated as they need to be, and every serious example that you can find about those layouts supports padding. You will find (and already found) a lot of good examples about it in the internet, just spend some time trying to understand them and you will see that they are not so complicated, in the end.
Anyway, I have a good demo layout similar to the second you are looking for, here:
http://www.meiaweb.com/test/BMS_DM_NI/
Basically, the html is this:
<body>
<div id="head">
<h1>Title</h1>
</div>
<div id="main">
<div id="navigation">
<!-- navigation content -->
</div>
<div id="content">
<h2>Content Title</h2>
<p>
<!-- main content here -->
</p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
And the css is:
html {
overflow: auto;
height: 100%;
}
body {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
font-family: Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
line-height: 1.5em;
}
#head {
height: 20px;
background-color: #666;
color: #AAA;
padding: 20px 20px;
}
#navigation {
width: 210px;
padding: 20px 20px;
background: #efefef;
border: none;
border-right: solid 1px #AAA;
float: left;
overflow: auto;
}
#content {
margin-left: 250px;
padding: 20px 20px;
}
I think it's simple enough, and it works in all modern browsers.
I know that it's badwrong to do, and I'm a semantic coder through-and-through (that wasn't meant to rhyme), but I still use a single layout table to do columns.
Why? It's interoperable and simple. It doesn't require ridiculous CSS hacks that just barely hold things together (seriously, floats are meant for typography, not layout). It displays identically in every browser in current use. It. Just. Works. It's a semantic hack, but sometimes you just gotta do what you gotta do.
However, there is light on the horizon. The table-* display values for CSS make equal-height columns trivial, though they can still violate source order (you still need your left-most column to be before your center column, even if it's a nav section and should come near the end of your page code). IE8, and all non-IE browsers, support these already.
CSS3 Grids and CSS3 Template Layout will both solve this issue properly, but they're still quite a bit away from being usable. A coder can dream, though, right?
You can also look at Layout Gala - 40 examples of different two and three percent and fizxed-sized column layouts.
I have reworked my sample template so you can see all three of your requested formats in action.
This is a CSS solution, no tables involved. I have set this up so the side columns are fixed width the header/footer are fixed height. Everything else is fluid.
With all modern browsers, excepting for IE7, the content is centered both vertically and horizontally. IE7 has issues with its box model. I believe IE8 have these resolved.
The center box does center vertically in IE7 because I nested a 1 cell table in the center div as a hack around IE7 box model problems. I know this is dumb and ugly but it was just to show it worked.
See it in action - Three Column Full Screen Layout
I am a bit surprised this answer did not garner a single vote or capture the bounty. It works, its simple, and it fulfills everything the OP asked for. Oh well.
The CSS
DIV { text-align: center }
#h0, #f0 { float: left; clear: both }
#h1, #f1 { height: 100px; float: none; width: 800px }
#l0 { float: left; clear: left; }
#c0, #r0 { float: left; clear: none }
#l1, #r1 { width: 150px }
#c1 { width: 500px }
#l1, #r1, #c1 { height: 350px }
#h0, #f0 { background-color: orange }
#l0 { background-color: red }
#r0 { background-color: blue }
#c0 { background-color: yellow }
#h1, #f1, #l1, #r1, #c1
{ display: table-cell; vertical-align: middle; }
The HTML
<div id="h0"><div id="h1">
header
</div></div>
<div id="l0"><div id="l1">
left column
</div></div>
<div id="c0"><div id="c1">
<img alt="dilbert (3K)" src="../gif/dilbert.gif" height="82" width="80" />
</div></div>
<div id="r0"><div id="r1">
right column
</div></div>
<div id="f0"><div id="f1">
footer
</div></div>
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/holygrail
That should be exactly what you need.
Take a look at Yahoo's YUI: Grids builder.
I found the Liquid two column layout at Floatutorial extremely helpful when setting up a full height two column layout - fixed left column with a stretchy right column, with a header and foot row to boot. In their example, they suggest the left column is used as navigation, but it could be anything.
With Floatutorial, not only do you get a sample HTML structure and CSS out of it, but when you're done, you understand why you have what you end up with.
I briefly tried the YUI: Grids builder as suggestd by #JohannesH, and had some small problems with it, but the worst problem is that it was so convoluted that I had no idea why it wasn't working, or why it was supposed to have done.
Edit: there's also a tutorial for a liquid three column layout (which I've not used), and a whole bunch of other tutorials that use floats.
In response to a message from the original poster, here's how I would do the first request with a <table> (the others are trivial modifications):
<style>
body {
height: 100%;
}
#container {
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
border-collapse: collapse;
}
#top, #left, #center, #right, #bottom {
border: 1px solid black;
text-align: center;
vertical-align: center;
}
#left, #right {
width: 200px;
}
#top, #bottom {
height: 200px;
}
</style>
<table id="container">
<tr>
<td colspan=3 id="top">header</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td id="left">left</td>
<td id="center">center</td>
<td id="right">right</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan=3 id="bottom">footer</td>
</tr>
</table>
There is a pre-fabbed css grid system that is based on the Golden Rule, and implements all types of column formats quite readily. Check out 960 Grid System. You can accomplish your goals without the use of tables. The nice thing that by using a pure CSS solution you can alter your layout more rapidly.
There is also a jQuery fluid implementation that has a fluid layout that you may be interested in.
This should have all you need:
http://maxdesign.com.au/presentation/page_layouts/
And a more general solution to all your CSS problems:
http://www.blueprintcss.org/
you should check out Elastic CSS Framework:
http://elasticss.com/two-columns-based-layout/
Cheers.
how could i vertically center a <div> within a <div> ?
my code so far:
<div style="height:322px;overflow:auto;">
<div style="border: Solid 1px #999999;padding:5px;">
</div>
</div>
i have tried "top:50%;" and "vertical-align:middle;" without success
EDIT: okay so it's been discussed a lot. and i've maybe started another mini flame war. but for argument sake, how would i do it with a table then? i've used css for everything else so far so it's not like i'm not trying to employ "good practices".
EDIT: the inner div does not have a fixed height
In short, you're stuffed. More on this in a recent question I asked Can you do this HTML layout without using tables? Basically the CSS fanatics need to get a grip and realize there's simply some things you can't do (or can't do well) without tables.
This anti-table hysteria is nothing short of ridiculous.
Table cells handle vertical centering really well and are backwards compatible as far as you could possibly care about. They also handle side-by-side content way better than floats, relative/absolute positioning or any of the other CSS type methods.
Joel coined (or at least popularized) the term "architect astronauts" in Don't Let Architecture Astronauts Scare You. Well, in that same vein I think the term "CSS Astronaut" (or "CSS Space Cadet") is equally appropriate.
CSS is an incredibly useful tool but it also has some pretty serious limitations. My favourite ishow numbered lists may only appear as "3." but not "3)" or "(3)" (at least prior to CSS3 generated content--or is it CSS2.1? Either way it's not widely supported). What an oversight.
But bigger than that is vertical centering and side-by-side layout. These two areas are still a huge problem for pure CSS. Another poster decided the relative positioning combined with negative margin heights was the way to go. How is that any better than:
<html>
<head>
<title>Layout</title>
<style type="text/css">
#outer { height: 200px; border: 1px solid black; width: 600px; background-color: #DDD; }
#inner { width: 150px; border: 1px solid red; background: yellow; margin: auto; line-height: 100%; }
</style>
</head>
<body>
<table>
<tr>
<td id="outer">
<div id="inner">Inner</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>
which will work everywhere, everytime.
Here is an article on vertical centering in CSS. To achieve a similar thing they use three nested divs with relative+absolute+relative positioning just to get vertical centering. I'm sorry but whoever wrote that--and anyone who thinks that's a good diea--has simply lost the plot.
A counterargument is given in Tables vs CSS: CSS Trolls begone. The proof really is in the pudding. The vast majority of the top 20 (Alexa) sites still use tables for layout. With good reason.
So decide for yourself: do you want your site to work and spend less time getting it to work? Or do you want to be a CSS Astronaut?
It's non-trivial, there can be caveats, and it's not something CSS handles well at this point.
It is however quite widely discussed and googleable. This is a good example.
Whatever you do, please don't fallback to tables.
Edit: this is ridiculous, the following works perfectly well in a strict doc without resorting to table markup:
<style type="text/css">
.outer {height: 322px; overflow: hidden; position: relative;}
*|html .outer {display: table; position: static;}
.middle {position: absolute; top: 50%;}
*|html .middle {display: table-cell; vertical-align: middle; position: static;}
.inner {position: relative; top: -50%; overflow: auto;}
*|html .inner {position: static; max-height: 322px;}
</style>
<!--[if IE]>
<style>
.inner {height: expression(Math.min(this.scrollHeight,322)+'px'); width: 100%;} /* for explorer only */
</style>
<![endif]-->
<div class="outer">
<div class="middle">
<div class="inner">
Any text any height
</div>
</div>
</div>
I like this solution best. It is for IE8+, and is easy to understand.
<style>
/* Can be any width and height */
.block {
height:500px;
text-align: center;
}
/* The ghost, nudged to maintain perfect centering */
.block:before {
content: '';
display: inline-block;
height: 100%;
vertical-align: middle;
margin-right: -0.25em; /* Adjusts for spacing */
}
/* The element to be centered, can be any width or height */
.centered {
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: middle;
width: 300px;
}
</style>
<div class="block"><div class="centered">Centered Content</div></div>
top: 50%; should work. you need to put margin-top to negative half of the height or it will start in the middle. Therefore, you need the height of the inner div. You also probably need position:relative;
Something like this for you inner div.
position:relative;
top: 50%;
height:80px;
margin-top: -40px; /*set to a negative number 1/2 of your height*/
Not very neat working with negative sizes (what does it even mean?) but maybe the easiest way.
<div style="display: table; height: 400px; #position: relative; overflow: hidden;">
<div style=" #position: absolute; #top: 50%;display: table-cell; vertical-align: middle;">
<div style=" #position: relative; #top: -50%">
vertically centered
</div>
</div>
</div>
more information
Two techniques of many
Browser compatibility of the following has been tested in IE only. Modern browsers should handle these no problem.
#1 - Absolute and auto margin
Compatibility: IE 8 +
The combination of top, right, bottom, left and margin: auto centers the div vertically and horizontally.
The width and height are needed, but can be percentages
Can also be applied to an inner div with the parent set position: relative
Note: A max-width and max-height instead of a percentage height is possible IE 9 +. IE 8 requires a height.
html,
body {
height: 100%;
}
.outer {
background: #ff8f00;
height: 50%;
width: 50%;
margin: auto;
position: absolute;
top: 0;
right: 0;
bottom: 0;
left: 0;
}
<div class="outer"></div>
#2 - Flexbox
Compatibility: IE 11. See here for other browser support.
Using Flexbox and flexible vw and vh lengths
body {
margin: 0;
}
.outer {
display: flex;
align-items: center;
justify-content: center;
height: 100vh;
}
.inner {
width: 50vw;
height: 50vh;
background: #ff8f00;
}
<div class="outer">
<div class="inner">
</div>
</div>
Do you absolutely need to do this with css? The above link looks pretty good, but you could get a result using javasctipt/jquery - determine the height of the innter div and adjust the margin.padding accordingly. Something similar to: (jquery)
var gap = ( $('the-outer-div').height() - $('the-inner-div').height() ) /2;
$('the-inner-div').css( "margin-top" , gap );
A table isn't necessary if you're willing to use the flexbox display model.
E.g.
<div style="height: 322px; width: 200px; display: flex; background: gray;">
<div style="border: Solid 1px #999999; padding:5px; margin: auto;">
This text would be both vertically AND horizontally centered, if it's inner height and width were less than the parent's height and width.
</div>
</div>
If you just want vertical centering use the rule "margin: auto 0;" in the child div.
p.s. You'll have to prefix your use of flexbox if you want cross-browser compatibility (e.g. "display: -webkit-flexbox;")
The display: flex property works especially well for centering, both vertically and horizontally. For vertical centering, add the properties display: flex and justify-content: center to the container.
Try line-height