Let´s say I have following mark up and CSS:
HTML:
<div id="Container">
<div id="Content">
[* some text *]
</div>
</div>
CSS:
#Container {
height: 400px;
overflow: scroll;
}
#Content {
height: 800px;
}
Obviously this set up invokes a scrollbar to possibly scroll down 400px. I created a jsFiddle for a better understanding.
Is there a way to jump to the second paragraph by CSS only?
I added a javascript command to demonstrate what I want to achieve. Just uncomment and run it.
There are two things that I have tried so far, but in both cases I was not able to scroll up anymore:
Setting the margin-top attribute of the inner div container to -180px
Setting the inner div container to position: absolute and top: -180px
Note: I do not care for the paragraph or any content. This is just an example. I want to jump to an arbitrary position.
Edit:
Anchor tags are not an option. I do not want to flood my mark up with unnecessary tags.
How about the humble 'a' tag?
jump to one
jump to two
<a name="one">this is one</a>
<a name="two">this is two</a>
Not with CSS, but with standard HTML/anchors.
http://jsfiddle.net/r6vn7/3/
paragraph 2
Give your paragraph an ID and use the URL hash to say where to go to. I used an anchor as an example how to make it jump to the second paragraph.
Related
Here is my code:
<style>
#defCalTree
{
overflow: scroll;
overflow-x: hidden;
}
</style>
and
<div class="defCalTree">
<div id="treeboxbox_tree" style="width:80%; height:100%;background-color:#f5f5f5;border :1px solid Silver; "></div>
</div>
and
to the treeboxbox_tree I attach a dhtmlx tree. But, the scroll bar which is shown I think doesn't refer to the tree. If the tree consists of many items, the div is getting bigger. It should remain the same size, and by using the scroll we will get to every item. What am I doing wrong?
In css you are using # which is selector for id and in html you are using class. so how your css will work. is this your problem or some thing else check it.
Try to either:
Amend <div class="defCalTree"> to <div id="defCalTree">
OR
amend #defCalTree to .defCalTree
You need to specify the height of the #defCalTree div. As it is now, it is growing in size to wrap its contents, which is the intended behaviour.
I have used css to make a "sticky header" that is always visible at the top of the page and the other content placed below it.
In the header I have some internal links. The problem is that when a link is clicked then the page is scrolled so that the target is positioned at the top of the page - hidden by my sticky header - instead of just below it.
Any suggestions on how to solve this problem?
css:
#header {
position: fixed;
top: 0;
left: 0;
width: 100%;
height: 3.5em;
padding:0;
margin: 0;
}
#container {
width: 100%;
margin: 3.5em 0 0 0;
padding: 0;
overflow:auto;
}
#content {
padding: 0 4em;
margin: 0;
}
html:
<body>
<div id="header">
<div id="content">
<p>
XYZ
</p>
</div> <!--end content-->
</div> <!--end header-->
<div id="container">
<div id="content">
<p>A lot of text.</p>
<a name="xyz"></a>
<p>A lot of text</p>
</div><!--end content-->
</div><!--end container-->
</body>
At first, it's better to use blocks with id instead of name — it's more standard way.
Then, add class to an anchor and then make it have absolute position + move it with a negative top margin equal to the header's height.
Look at this fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/kizu/gfXJJ/
Or, alternatively, for browsers that support pseudo-elements, you can add one with the desired height and compensate it's height by negative top margin, so it would amount as the start of the block to which you'd make a link. Doing so you can add ids to already existent elements rather than creating extra ones.
Here is a version with pseudo-element: http://jsfiddle.net/kizu/gfXJJ/2/
Or you can add top padding and negative margin to an element with id itself: http://jsfiddle.net/kizu/gfXJJ/2/ — but in that case there can be problems with backgrounds on it, 'cause the block is physically extended at the top.
A little bit of javascript (jQuery used here) can do it:
$('#header a').click(function (e) {
e.preventDefault();
var offset = $('a[name=' + $(this).attr('href').substr(1) + ']').offset();
$('html, body').animate({ scrollTop: offset.top - $('#header').outerHeight() }, 'fast');
});
This finds the element with a name attribute that matches the href attribute of the link clicked, and then animates a scroll to that element's position less the height of the header.
http://jsfiddle.net/blineberry/bTa8b/
I believe this question overlaps the one in this link: offsetting an html anchor to adjust for fixed header which offers even more possible solutions. I believe the questions could be merged, but I don't have the priviliges to do that. (Which is the same reason I'm entering this as an answer allthough I know it should have been a comment. But I'm not allowed to comment.)
You could also set a top-margin as high as the sticky header for your xyz-fragment in your CSS file. That might result in an empty gap in your result HTML-page though...
One simple thing to do is to place the <a name="xyz"></a> slightly higher up the text.
This would require some trial and error, but it might be the quickest/easiest thing to do.
Another thing you could do is to dynamically add margin or padding when the link is clicked.
Start with getting unique ID's for the content part in the header and inside the container.
Maybe you can put an ul inside the header for the internal links.
Set the position of the content inside the wrapper absolute, et voila!
Is there any place we can get a look at your problem?
Pseudo elements don't appear to work in all scenarios. I had luck just applying a negative top margin and a positive top padding to offset to negative margin.
eg. <a id="xyz" style="margin-top:-50px; padding-top:50px">Title</a>
Alright, I understand that the purpose of a DIV is to contain its inner elements - I didn't want to upset anyone by saying otherwise. However, please consider the following scenario:
My web page (which only takes up a width of 70% of the entire page) is surrounded by a container (a div). However, under my navigation bar which is at the top of the page, I would like to create w banner that takes up 100% of the width of the entire page (which means it will have to extend outside the bounds of its container as the container is only taking up 70% of the page's width).
This is the basic idea that I am trying to accomplish: http://www.petersonassociates.biz/
Does anyone have any suggestions for how I could accomplish this? I'd appreciate any help.
Evan
If you just want the background of the element to extend across the whole page this can also be achieved with negative margins.
In a nutshell (correction from comment):
.bleed {
padding-left: 3000px;
margin-left: -3000px;
padding-right: 3000px;
margin-right: -3000px;
}
That gives you horizontal scroll bars which you remove with:
body {overflow-x: hidden; }
There is a guide at http://www.sitepoint.com/css-extend-full-width-bars/.
It might be more semantic to do this with psuedo elements: http://css-tricks.com/full-browser-width-bars/
EDIT (2019):
There is a new trick to get a full bleed using this CSS utility:
width: 100vw;
margin-left: 50%;
transform: translateX(-50%);
I guess all solutions are kind of outdated.
The easiest way to escape the bounds of an element is by adding:
margin-left: calc(~"-50vw + 50%");
margin-right: calc(~"-50vw + 50%");
discussion can be found here and here. There is also a nice solution for the upcoming grid-layouts.
If I understood correctly,
style="width: 100%; position:absolute;"
should achieve what you're going for.
There are a couple of ways you could do this.
Absolute Positioning
Like others have suggested, if you give the element that you want to stretch across the page CSS properties of 100% width and absolute position, it will span the entire width of the page.
However, it will also be situated at the top of the page, probably obscuring your other content, which won't make room for your now 100% content. Absolute positioning removes the element from the document flow, so it will act as though your newly positioned content doesn't exist. Unless you're prepared to calculate exactly where your new element should be and make room for it, this is probably not the best way.
Images: you can also use a collection of images to get at what you want, but good luck updating it or making changes to the height of any part of your page, etc. Again, not great for maintainability.
Nested DIVs
This is how I would suggest you do it. Before we worry about any of the 100% width stuff, I'll first show you how to set up the 70% centered look.
<div class="header">
<div class="center">
// Header content
</div>
</div>
<div class="mainContent">
<div class="center">
// Main content
</div>
</div>
<div class="footer">
<div class="center">
// Footer content
</div>
</div>
With CSS like this:
.center {
width: 70%;
margin: 0 auto;
}
Now you have what appears to be a container around your centered content, when in reality each row of content moving down the page is made up of a containing div, with a semantic and descriptive class (like header, mainContent, etc.), with a "center" class inside of it.
With that set up, making the header appear to "break out of the container div" is as easy as:
.header {
background-color: navy;
}
And the color reaches to the edges of the page. If for some reason you want the content itself to stretch across the page, you could do:
.header .center {
width: auto;
}
And that style would override the .center style, and make the header's content extend to the edges of the page.
Good luck!
The more semantically correct way of doing this is to put your header outside of your main container, avoiding the position:absolute.
Example:
<html>
<head>
<title>A title</title>
<style type="text/css">
.main-content {
width: 70%;
margin: 0 auto;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<header><!-- Some header stuff --></header>
<section class="main-content"><!-- Content you already have that takes up 70% --></section>
<body>
</html>
The other method (keeping it in <section class="main-content">) is as you said, incorrect, as a div (or section) is supposed to contain elements, not have them extend out of bounds of their parent div/section. You'll also face problems in IE (I believe anything 7 or below, this might just be IE6 or less though) if your child div extends outside the parent div.
I've used the last example on this page for equal height columns.
http://www.ejeliot.com/blog/61
The problem is, when you click an internal anchor link, the content is shifted up, and the overflow is making the top part of the page disappear.
For example, click this link
http://www.noosanativeplants.com.au/~new/articles/botany-words/
Then click a letter to jump to that section. You will notice what I am describing.
Is there a way to combat this, or is this a short coming of the technique? Do you recommend I use the background image technique for faux equal height columns? I'd rather not use this, as one page has a different background, and would require a bit of reworking to do the background for this page.
Thanks
I really recommend you to use the fail-safe faux columns method. If you are not a layout expert (no offence, seriously), stay away from the padding/margin/overflow magic and the one true layout technique. The latter is elegant but it can cause unwanted side-effects if you are to do heavy JS/DOM manipulations and all (see the problems listing).
As slink said you have two overflow: hidden rules in your css:
#main-container {
overflow:hidden;
}
And
#content {
overflow:hidden;
}
If you disable/remove these you will able to use your scrollbars again. Unfortunately the padding / negative margin "hack" will be visible. I recommend you to completely remove this solution and use faux columns. Faux columns background can be added to your #main-content or even the #content div (not just like the example in the ALA article that sets the background image to the body tag).
Good luck!
Update: Sorry, let me correct myself: to use faux columns in your case it is better to set the current background to the html element and the faux background to body element.
Assuming your equal height columns are the left menu and right content in that example, you could just use a margin-left property on the right-column and set the background colour of the container to the desired left-column colour. This would assume your right content always has a greater height than the left, but there are other ways round this.
#container {
width: 960px;
background-color: #000;
}
#menu {
float:left;
width: 240px;
}
#content {
float:right:
margin-left: 240px;
background-color: #fff;
}
<div id="container">
<div id="menu">
<ul>
<li>Home</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div id="content">
stuff goes here
</div>
</div>
The problem is caused by two overflow: hidden; rules defined on elements #content and #main-contaniner.
I am essentially trying to create a version of the "figure" element (upcoming in HTML5), whereby I have an image with a short description below it.
However, I want to limit the width of this entire element to that of the image, so the text isn't wider than the image (wrapping to multiple lines if necessary).
Basic HTML:
<div class="figure">
<img src="..." alt="..." width="..." height="..." /><br />
A description for the image
</div>
I'm well-versed with CSS but I can't think of any pure CSS solution, without adding a style="width:100px" to the div to match the image width.
Update: After a bit of searching and thinking, the best method seems to be using an inline width on the div. I will keep the width attribute on the image, in case I wish the div to be a bit wider than the image (for example to accomodate a longer caption).
This approach also means I could have two images side-by-side with a caption below. If I have a set of images the same size, I can of course add an extra style to each div.
Thanks to everyone who answered!
This could also be accomplished using 'display: table-caption' for the caption, as follows:
HTML
<div class="wrapper">
<img src="image.jpg" />
<div class="caption">My caption...</div>
</div>
Stylesheet
.wrapper {
display: table;
}
.caption {
display: table-caption;
caption-side: bottom;
}
This block can also be floated left of right of other text. I've tested this in IE8+. Here's a JSBin example: http://jsbin.com/xiyevovelixu/1
For setting the width to match the image automatically you could use
.figure {
display: table;
width: 1px;
}
This makes the div behave like a table (not supported in Internet Explorer). Or you could use a table instead of the div. I don't think there is another way of setting the width automatically.
Edit: The simplest way is to forget about the auto width and set it by hand. If it is really needed you can use JavaScript or a table. In this case the use of a table is not so ugly because you are addressing a limitation of the HTML version. In the case of server-side scripting you could also set the width when generating the page.
Stylesheet
div.figure img,
div.figure div.caption {
width: 100%;
}
div.figure div {
overflow: hidden;
white-space: nowrap;
}
note: to enable wrapping just remove that last css line
HTML
<div class="figure" style="width:150px;">
<img src="logo.png" alt="logo" />
<div class="caption">A description for the image</div>
</div>
I've checked it in Chrome, Firefox and IE7 and it looks good in all three. I realise this has the width on the div and not the img, but at least you only need to set the width in one place. Short of using css-expressions (IE only) I can't see a way of setting the outer divs width to the width of the first child element.
I had the same problem and after reading this decided to use an inline-style on the surrounding element. Seems the better solution over using a table to me.
You can also acheive this using the following solution proposed by Temani Afif in his blog post (All credits to him, I just don't want the solution to be forgotten)
<div class="box">
<img>
<h1>Lorem ipsum dolor ..</h1>
</div>
.box {
display: inline-block;
}
h1 {
width: 0;
min-width: 100%;
}
Make the container inline-block, and makes the h1 (or whatever text tag you use) occupy the space dictated by the sibling element. It's essentially a hack, but it works! No unintended semantic consequences like the table solutions
You could use the display:table solution for all other browsers, and a CSS Behaviour for Internet Explorer.