I'm new to CSS and I'm trying to understand how to fix the following line from not working for top and bottom margins. It works for side margins just fine, however:
.contents {
...
margin: 10px 10px 10px 10px;
}
Example: http://jsfiddle.net/LCTeU/
How do I fix this?
Edit:
I've also tried padding the container instead, and that just expands the container to maximum size (why?):
.container {
...
padding: 10px 10px 10px 10px;
}
Use overflow:auto on any of the elements that are involved with the collapse. For example:
article {
overflow:auto;
}
jsFiddle example
This answer is based off of the fiddle you provided.
I think your approach is incorrect in that your applying a margin to the article to space it within the parent div tag. It is better to use padding in this case, since your attempting to separate the content from its outside border. So apply:
article {
//display: block;
clear: both;
padding: 10px;
}
This will cause the article tags to increase in size, however the borders of the container div elements will now be touching. To create space between elements a margin is applied.
.rounded-box {
background-color: #959392;
border-radius: 15px;
margin: 10px 0px;
}
Working Example http://jsfiddle.net/LCTeU/4/
So just to recap, when you want to create space between two elements use margin. When you want to create space between an element and its border (or you want an element to be surrounded by whitespace) use padding.
I found a fix that does not require a padding, and does not require changing the overflow of the container element:
article:after {
content: "";
display: block;
overflow: auto;
}
The idea being that we add another element at the bottom that disrupts the collapsing margin, without affecting the height or padding.
As per the fix that Erik Rothoff suggested, which does not seem to work in Safari, first I tried the following:
article:after {
content: "";
display: inline-block;
overflow: auto;
}
This does work in Safari but takes up space which I could not get rid off, messing up the grid so much that I would need to change margins.
Then I decided to combine the two by doing the following:
article:after {
content: "";
display: block;
padding-top: 1px;
margin-top: -1px;
}
This works in Safari, has an acceptable height of 1px which is negated by the negative margin top.
Related
I have a list of inline-block elements, and I want to add a border to the element you hover over. However, notice how the border offsets the element, even when I use box-sizing: border-box and explicitly define the widths and heights of the elements. I illustrated the behavior below:
* { box-sizing: border-box }
ul { font-size: 0 }
li {
display: inline-block;
width: 100px; height: 40px; margin: 10px;
font-size: 20px; text-align: center;
background-color: #FFF176;
}
li:hover { border: 5px dashed grey }
<ul>
<li>hover</li>
<li>over</li>
<li>me!</li>
</ul>
The best solution I found is to use outline and outline-offset instead of border, but I'd really like to know why my original method doesn't work :/
UPDATE: While BoltClock gave a really great explanation and suggestion (which was all I was asking for), I just wanted to mention that I totally forgot about flexbox, which solved pretty much all the problems I was having with inline elements. I combined it with BoltClock's transparent border trick for my final JSFiddle solution
I see the problem now. What's happening is that box-sizing: border-box causes the content box of each element to shrink both horizontally and vertically once you add a border. Because your elements are inline-blocks, the vertical shrinking affects the baseline of the element being hovered, and therefore the baseline of the line it's on, resulting in the other elements on the same line being offset. If you look closely, you'll notice that the text actually stays aligned, which is the goal of offsetting the elements.
Changing the border to an outline works because outlines are designed to have no effect on layout (and also because you then take borders completely out of the picture).
However, it is for this reason that using an outline this way produces a significantly different effect from your original effect with a border. Setting an initial transparent border instead of an outline will ensure that your content stays offset the right amount whether the border is visible against the background (this was shown in a previous answer but it was deleted presumably because it was downvoted):
* { box-sizing: border-box }
ul { font-size: 0 }
li {
display: inline-block;
width: 100px; height: 40px; margin: 10px;
font-size: 20px; text-align: center;
background-color: #FFF176;
border: 5px dashed transparent;
}
li:hover { border-color: grey }
<ul>
<li>hover</li>
<li>over</li>
<li>me!</li>
</ul>
So, I've managed to make this CSS work, but I'm not 100% sure why it does. I know that's the classic programmer's scenario. I'd like to know why it does, though, so that I can get better.
Here are the two JSfiddle cases (they're exactly the same but with one line different):
With display:block
With float:left
As you can see, the important line of CSS:
.name::before {
content: '';
background: purple;
position: relative;
float: left; /* OR -display: block;- */
height: 22px; width: 100%;
margin-top: -22px; margin-left: -11px;
padding: 0 0px 0 22px;
}
With display:block, the pseudo-element matches the width of the main element (including the borders and padding. However, with float:left, the pseudo-element actually extends the width of the main element; if you change the padding-left to 11px, the increased width disappears, but the ::before stops short and doesn't include the main element's padding+border. This makes me think that inline elements affect other elements that it doesn't share a line with, as long as they're in the same container. Is that right?
Oddly, if you make change the padding to padding: 0 11px, it doesn't extend the right side of the ::before to the edge of the main element like I thought it would. Why is that?
Thanks!
My opinion is:
display: block;
only display the element in block,
while
float: left;
does push the element to the very left of its parents.
If you want to have all the elements to be in one line,
try to use display: inline;
I have an image with float:left, and I’d like it to overflow its parent, but cut off the overflow. Here’s what it looks like without any overflow rules:
Here’s what I want:
Here’s a fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/ZA5Lm/
For some reason, it was decided that overflow:hidden without an explicit height results in the element growing.
Can I somehow achieve the effect I’m after without setting an explicit height? An explicit height doesn’t work because I want this div to size automatically based on content length and browser width.
In my opinion using overflow: hidden without setting dimensions doesn't make sense. If you don't want to specify the height of the container and if your images have a fixed width you could use this solution: http://jsfiddle.net/ZA5Lm/11/
The image is positioned with absolute, taking it out of the text-flow. However - and I'm aware that this may be ugly - you need to specify a padding-left to move the text away from the image.
It's a bit tricky (I use relative + absolute positioning and a specific padding to position text) but it does the effect you asked without changing markup or setting height:
body {
padding: 10px;
}
img {
float: left;
position: absolute;
left : 10px;
}
div {
border: 1px solid black;
padding: 10px 10px 10px 280px;
position : relative;
overflow: hidden;
}
I just inserted style (even if float:left would be no longer necessary)
I seen a post over at CSS-Tricks and it talked about this. Go check it out at -
http://css-tricks.com/minimum-paragraph-widths/
It might be useful :) Good luck
Also just looked at your code and I added float: right to your div so it looks like this -
div {
border: 1px solid black;
padding: 10px;
float: right
/*overflow: hidden;*/
}
Not sure if that's what you want?
I currently have a footer that uses a 3 column layout with a fixed center and fluid sides in order to get a nice box shadow effect. When the window is too small however, it pushes the footer to the left, and messes everything up.
I can't seem to figure out how to make sure the footer divs do not get pushed around. I keep running into this problem with my layouts.
The layout I am working on is here, and a screencast showing the problem is here.
The easiest solution is simply to add min-width:980px to #container.
#container {
background: none repeat scroll 0 0 #A8D9A7;
height: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
position: relative;
z-index: 5;
min-width: 980px; /* add this */
}
The 980px figure comes from the width:960px + padding-left:10px + padding-right:10px of the #content-container.
The container element for your main page body (<div id="body">) has computed padding-left of 10px, and the second container element, (<div id="content-container">) adds another padding-left of 10px, meaning your main body is padded from the left by 20px.
Whereas the container for your footer (<div id="footer-container">) has computed padding-left of 0.
If you add this, it will fix your problem. #footer-container {padding: 0 20px;}
Revised as the above solution messed up bottom box-shadow.
In the #footer-left-outer { rule change:
margin-right:470px;
to:
margin-right:-490px;
In the #footer-right-outer { rule change:
margin-left:-470px;
to:
margin-left:-490px;
In the #footer { rule change:
padding: 10px 10px 10px 10px;
width: 940px;
to:
padding: 10px 30px;
width: 980px;
I now understand why you were using the outer-right and outer-left.
I found a different solution that includes the partial box-shadow effect:
http://jsfiddle.net/nottrobin/Cr4NF/10/
It avoids the need for footer-left-outer and footer-right-outer but I'll leave it up to you to decide if it's neater.
It makes use of :before which only works in IE8 onwards:
http://caniuse.com/#search=:before
But then box-shadow doesn't work in IEs < 9 anyway:
http://caniuse.com/#search=box-shadow
How can I get an image to stretch the height of a DIV class?
Currently it looks like this:
However, I would like the DIV to be stretched so the image fits properly, but I do not want to resize the `image.
Here is the CSS for the DIV (the grey box):
.product1 {
width: 100%;
padding: 5px;
margin: 0px 0px 15px -5px;
background: #ADA19A;
color: #000000;
min-height: 100px;
}
The CSS being applied on the image:
.product{
display: inline;
float: left;
}
So, how can I fix this?
Add overflow:auto; to .product1
In the markup after the image, insert something like <div style="clear:left"/>. A bit messy, but it's the easiest way I've found.
And while you're at it, put a bit of margin on that image so the text doesn't butt up against it.
Assuming #John Millikin is correct, the code
.product + * { clear: left; }
would suffice to do the same thing without forcing you to manually adjust the code after the div.
One trick you can use is to set the <div>'s overflow property to hidden. This forces browsers to calculate the physical size of the box, and fixes the weird overlap problem with the floated image. It will save you from adding in any extra HTML markup.
Here's how the class should look:
.product1 {
width: 100%;
padding: 5px;
margin: 0px 0px 15px -5px;
background: #ADA19A;
color: #000000;
min-height: 100px;
overflow: hidden;
}
This looks like a job for clearfix to me ...
Try the following:
.Strech
{
background:url(image.jpg);
background-size:100% 100%;
background-repeat:no-repeat;
width:500px;
height:500px;
}
display:inline
float:left
is your problem
Floating makes the parents width not be stretched by the child, try placing the image without the float. If you take the float off, it should give you the desired effect.
Another approach would be to make sure you are clearing your floats at the end of the parent element so that they don't scope creep.
Update: After viewing your link Your height issue as displayed, is because the floats are not being cleared.