I've got a container that's set to a max-width:780px and height is undeclared. Inside the container, there's an image slideshow. Everything on the page is responsive, so as the width decreases, the image (who's width is set to 100%) adjust's the heights container.
The slideshow change's the images to display:static; and position:absolute; which no longer "holds open" the container because it's not seen as content of the container
Is there any creative solution out there to take the height of a child element that's absolutely positioned?
Example below has NO height declared on the main container.. nothing's holding it open.
http://dhut.ch/test/santos/
Thank you!
Are the images all the same dimensions? If yes, you can use a percentage padding-top on the element that contains the images.
So if your images are all, say, 760px wide by 500px tall, that's 500/760 = .65789
Which as percentage would translate into something like:
#main {
position: relative;
max-width: 760px;
padding-top: 65.789%;
}
The reason this works is because with padding if it's set with a percentage, it is calculated as a percentage of the width. As the element shrinks in width, the height will shrink proportionately and the box will remain in the same ratio of width to height. The images, positioned absolutely, won't be adding to the height of the box.
This'll work as long as your images are all the same aspect ratio and you're not expecting that ratio to change. If you'll be using a lot of random images, this isn't for you.
I recently had a similar problem with an image that I needed to absolute position at the top of a Zurb Foundation templated page in order to pull it out of the flow and reset its dimensions (Image had to stretch to edges of wrapper, instead be enclosed by its parent .row padding). However, of course, this meant that all the fluid responsive elements below it popped right up over the top of the image. Setting a margin-top or positioning the sibling elements below meant a rigid top space that didn't resize with the width of the browser.
To get around it, I placed a duplicate of the image right after the absolute positioned image and set its visibility: hidden; I had to add a little bit of extra margin bottom to make up for the difference in height, but the end result is everything on the page flowing exactly to the height of the image in use.
I've also used the padding trick described by unexplainedBacn above, and it's a great trick as well. It takes a little bit of math, but I voted that answer up. Great solution.
I think you'd better change your approach. For sliders, the best practices is to float child elements of the container, and also use one of the known techniques to prevent parent's great collapse. So, I suggest that you remove the position: absolute CSS rule from images and float them inside your <div id='main'>, then use any of these methods to force it to encompass it's children:
div#main {overflow: hidden;}
div#main:after {content: ''; display: block; clear: both; visibility: hidden;}
Add a <div style='clear: both;'> to the end of your main div container.
Remove the absolute position. I would avoid inline styling as well.
Related
I'm asking this for learning purposes; there aren't any negative aspects on this behaviour, but I just wonder if this could have any negative consequences in the future.
So I have a container div: content_wrap, which has two other div's: side_bar and main_content. The container div is 980px width, and is used to center its contents using margin-left and margin-right.
It's doing this correctly, however, when I was debugging the page (in Firefox), I noticed that the browser renders the div as being 0x0px and renders the parent div off-screen. However, it does position the child divs correctly. See this JSFiddle for an example: http://jsfiddle.net/7fsXp/7/
I Googled this and most of the answers have something to do with floats and are solved by using clear:both, but I don't use any floats. I did notice that if I change the main_content div from position:absolute; to position:relative;, the content_wrap is displayed correctly. Or I can fix it by setting a height for content_wrap.
I don't actually need to be able to see the content_wrap, so there isn't really a problem, as it is doing its job in means of centering the child divs. I just wondered if it would be a bad practice to leave it like this? Is it a bad thing, or does it matter?
Try adding other elements to this HTML and enjoy the horror :D
There are actually many things in your code, that I wouldn't do. First of all, when an element is with position: absolute or position: fixed its layout is "ignored" by other elements or in other words cannot "push" any element and that is why your container is having 0 height. It's like they are ethereal (best explanation ever, I know).
You should check this article on positioning -- http://css-tricks.com/absolute-relative-fixed-positioining-how-do-they-differ/
The fact that they are in the place you expect them to be is that there are actually no other elements in the HTML and the absolute element is positioned relatively to the body and so is the fixed one (but that's what elements with position: fixed always do). Looks what happens when I add some other content to the parent div -- http://jsfiddle.net/7fsXp/13/
So long story short - you shouldn't form your layout with absolute or fixed elements if you can do it without them.
position: fixed and position: absolute take the elements out of the flow, so using either of these positions on all child divs will collapse the parent div entirely.
If you have content below a collapsed div, it will flow up and over/under that content like this.
You don't need to position the main_content div absolutely, but you'll need to change a few things to top align the sidebar and main_content.
DEMO
Since sidebar is fixed, it's using the document, not the container div as a reference for top, while main_content would use the body (unless you add position: relative to the container). Getting rid of the body's default padding/margin will fix the small alignment difference.
body {
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
}
#main_content {
//remove position: absolute;
margin-top:70px; //top: 70px won't work unless you specify position
}
It depends on what you are willing to do, but because the default position for div is position: static; changing the position: relative; will avoid the collapse of parent div.
I'm developing a mobile website that integrates horizontal swiping. Unfortunately this has created a headache when trying to get the rest of my website layout to work.
http://jsfiddle.net/N7eWS/4/ - try resizing your browser window fairly small and you'll see the #footer (red) halfway down the content inside #wrapper (green). This appears to be todo with setting height:100% on most of the elements and then the absolute positioning applied to the horizontal swiping div (swipeview-masterpage-1).
I want it so that #wrapper expands to the height of the content, the #footer sits underneath #wrapper and is always off the bottom of the screen (you should have to scroll to see it).
Is there anyway I can make this work without touching (or perhaps making minor changes to) the swipeview divs? Any ideas would be appreciated!
One of the problems is the position: absolute on #swipeview-masterpage-1 and then another absolute on the parent. Parent absolute elements will not expand to the height of any absolutely positioned children (example).
You also have a random <span> in the mix, which is an inline element and will have a height of 0 anyway. Remove that to make things clearer.
Now to why your footer is appearing in a strange way. Your #wrapper will always be 100% of the parent height, your footer will always exist at 100px (header) + 100%. Disable the min-height property and you will see the wrapper collapse, and the footer sit at 100px. That's why the #wrapper content overlaps the footer.
Have a strange problem (strange because I do not understand it)
Trying to use jQuery UI Tabs with 100% height and a vertical overflow scrollbar for the content.
This does not work - the scrollable area is bigger then the visible area resulting in the lower part of the scrollbar to be below the visible area. Looks like the scroll area is extended with the height of the list area.
The problem is only valid with 100% height (have testet this in different ways). As soon as I set a fixed height (in some way) the problem is gone???
Have after some test found out that the UI is not to blame and the problem is also valid with native list items.
My setup is this:
I need to use all available space (complete iframe, div, window)
I do not know the height of the top list.
I need to use the remaining space for content with vertical overflow
Will not use a script to modify the height (must be possible with CSS and HTML5 alone)
You can see a demonstration here:
http://jsfiddle.net/beasty/6cAat/10/
Any suggestion on how to fix it?
Thank you
Benny
The css property height: 100% has no effect on relatively positioned elements.
<div style="position: relative; height: 100%; border-style: solid; border-width:2px;">
<div id="contenttab" style="position: absolute; top: 0; bottom: 0; right: 0; left: 0; overflow-y: auto;">
Looong text
</div>
</div>
Here's a slightly better way to do this. You'll still have to determine the height of the list above the absolutely positioned div.
This is because the top-level div element has its overflow hidden. Its child div element extends beyond the height of its parent because its height is 100%. The browser calculates the height of the parent, which in this case is 643 pixels. So the child is also 643 pixels, even though it has to share the visible space with the unordered list, which is 60 pixels in height. Therefore, 60 pixels of the child div element is hidden from view.
As a solution, you could set the height of the ul to 10% and the child div to 90%. But be careful! You're using borders which aren't included in the height declaration, so you'll still lost a certain amount of the child div exactly equal to the number of pixels of border you're using. Also, if the ul ever grows, its contents could be cut from view as well. It's probably a better idea to not specify a height for the child div or the ul and instead allow the parent div to overflow-y. Otherwise it kind of seems "frame-y".
So most of this site so far uses auto centering (the container and nav have margin-left/right:auto) and things seem to go all well and dandy except for the footer.
When I resize the size of the window everything is filled nicely except when I scroll horizontally the footer seems to be cut off on the right side.I've read that this may be a browser bug. Though it occurs in IE and chrome and firefox so it could just be sloppy coding (I am a big newb).
Here is the css:
#footer {
background-image:url(../Images/footer_bg.jpg);
color: white;
height:300px;
padding-top:20px;
}
/*I have 4 headings with Ps that I want to display horizontally side by side*/
#footerContent{
min-width:1000px;
}
/*So I tried floating <li> inside <ul> and limiting its width, which worked fine */
#footerContent ul{
width:1000px;
margin-left:auto;
margin-right:auto;
}
#footerContent li {float:left; width:250px; }
Just to reiterate it works fine when the browser is full screened or resized. But after you resize and you use the horizantal scrollbar to scroll all the way right then the background image is cut off.
I've tried width:100%, min-width, width:1000px; but none of those seemed to work.
http://postimage.org/image/3so264fnb/
Regarding your comment about Stackoverflow being similar
(at least as of 4-29-2012)
The issue on stackoverflow seems to be that the footer contains another div element, footerwrap, that has a width: 960px set to it, but footer itself has no width setting. A div is basically designed to simply "group" block level content. It is a common misconception that a div expands with it's content. Actually, a div expands to its parent if an explicit width is set on a parent. If there is none, then it fits the browser window. This is what you (and stackoverflow) is experiencing.
To get the div to relate to the content width, you must either:
Explicitly set the width or min-width of the container. So, if stackoverflow set a min-width: 990px (the 960px of the footerwrap + the padding of 15px on each side) on the footer that wraps footerwrap, then its problem is solved.
Set the container div to float, as a floated element wraps its content.
Take a look at this example fiddle. Note the first two div's experience the same issue you are seeing. If you shrink or expand the size of the iframe window in the fiddle, the first two div's will contract or enlarge with it, but still leave blank space on the horizontal scroll. The third and fourth div's have had my fixes above applied. The fifth div is to show the fact that the inner div, if not defined in width, will expand to the width of a container that has an explicit width set.
As a side note, it may work (I have not tested in many browsers, but FF 11 worked) to actually just add a float: left to the body element in those cases where the body does not have a set width. As this example shows, it seems to be effective in causing the first two div's to behave just like the 3rd and 4th divs.
I hope this helps.
Original Answer
It is a little unclear what can be done because there is some information lacking. Here are some things to look for:
Is your background-image wide enough (or can it / should it have a background-repeat: repeat-x applied to make it wider if needed)?
Does your footer width (1000px) match your upper content width? If footer is constrained narrower than what the upper content area (or header, etc.) is allowed to be, then it's background will not align.
That's the best I can do without seeing more of your html and css for the page, and not knowing the size of the image and your intention for how it is to function.
i have a problem with the entire content of my page.
The problem being without a scrollbar present my content is about 20px to the right, but when a scrollbar is present it shifts to the left.
I have to compensate for this for an absolute postioned div by positioning it over the content by 20px until a scrollbar is present as it rests at the right hand side of the page.
This is a crappy fault on my behalf but i just want an easy way to fix this. Any quick and easy suggestions? Would i be better off making the main content div an absolute one?
One quick and dirty way is to always force the scrollbar to be visible with:
html { overflow-y: scroll; }
Not ideal, but it standardizes the appearance if the lack of scrollbar offset is breaking your design.
If I'm understanding your problem correctly, your absolute div is 20px off when a scrollbar is present? If that is the case what you can do is set a parent div that wraps around your content and absolute div.
Be sure to set this wrapper div to position: relative; so now your absolute div will be positioned inside the relative div instead of the document level. If there is a scrollbar, the wrapper div will be offset to the left by 20px (the width of the scrollbar) and the absolute div will also.
<div class="wrapper">
your content goes here
<div class="absoluteDiv"></div>
</div>
.wrapper { position: relative; }
.absoluteDiv { position: absolute; }
I don't think your content is actually shifting in any sort of buggy way; it's just that the presence of the scroll bar makes the viewport narrower. If you're using a layout that depends on viewport width (e.g. fluid layout, or fixed-width with centered content), this will cause everything to move by half the width of the scroll bar when it appears.
AFAIK, there's no sure-fire way to compensate for that, since the width of the scroll bar isn't known.