I'm using the Bootstrap 3 grid to hide/show nav bar content based on whether or not the user is using an extra small device.
I'm using .hidden-xs and .visible-xs classes. These classes appropriately hide/show the content, but I'm running into two problems:
(1) Hiding the content also shrinks the column spacing by .col-xs-5 because the div is hidden. I tried adding .visible-xs to a subsequent div and using .col-xs-5 to make up the empty space. This works, but only if I place content inside the divs. I just want the columns to be spaced out.
(2) On XS view size, the final item on the Nav bar "Nav" jumps to the next row. I have only accounted for 12 total columns.
See this JSFiddle. I'm trying to nly show "Welcome" on large view and show nothing on XS view.
I here's an idea, you can try instead of adding content. This CSS trick uses :before and :after CSS pseudo-classes.
.no_content {
display: block;
content: "";
width: 151px;
height: 35px;
background: transparent url(tape.png) 0 0 no-repeat;
}
<div class="no_content"></div>
I would look at the grid system further. I believe there is an offset that you can use to offset the div like this:
<div class="row">
<div class="col-xs-5 col-xs-offset-5></div>
<div class="col-xs-2></div>
</div>
Use the pull-right bootstrap class instead of trying to make empty div's fill in the space.
Completely remove the div you added in item (1) to "make up the space". On the div containing "Nav" set the class as pull-right col-xs-1. So the code from your JSFiddle becomes:
<div class="container">
<div class="row" id="header">
<div class="col-xs-5" id="brand-wrapper">
<div class="brand">Brand</div>
</div>
<!-- Hidden on XS Devices -->
<div class="hidden-xs col-xs-5">
<p>
Welcome
</p>
</div>
<!-- Nav -->
<div class="pull-right col-xs-1" id="toggle-wrapper">
<p>Nav</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
I'm having the same problem the author of this question exhibits with affix, specifically the authors comment on the accepted answer. The answerer provides a secondary solution, but this is unsatisfactory.
The issue occurs when all of the following conditions are present:
Affixed div is taller than view port
Affixed div is tallest part of page
User scrolls past affix-top
It is demonstrated in this JSFiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/g1ns9k8o/3/ with the following code:
CSS:
.top-bit { height: 100px; }
.sidebar { width: 200px; padding: 10px; }
.sidebar.affix { top: 10px; }
HTML:
<div class="top-bit">
</div>
<div class="row">
<div class="col-xs-9">
<!-- short content -->
</div>
<div class="col-xs-3">
<div class="sidebar" data-spy="affix" data-offset-top="100">
<!-- long content -->
</div>
</div>
</div>
I had this problem and ran into the jerky scroll movement. To fix it, I used JavaScript to compare the height of the affixed element to the element it is sitting next to. If the affixed height is less than the content height, set the affix. Otherwise, just let the affixed element sit where it is.
So, say it's a sidebar that I'm fixing next to a content element.
// Pseudocode
if (sidebar.height < content.height) {
$(sidebar).affix({});
}
I'm stying bootstrap sticky footer on my project: http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/examples/sticky-footer.html
Is it possible to set height of content to fill remained space?
Let me explain. I want to reside image and I need to it gets sized relates to available height.
If your intention is fill any space between the end of the content and the start of the footer, I can see all sorts of challenges.
Depending on the specifics of your image, maybe you can include it as a background like this:
http://jsfiddle.net/panchroma/hBzjn/
You could use media queries, possibly with different images at different viewponts and also use padding to refine the results.
Good luck!
HTML
<div id="wrap">
<div class="contentWrap">
<!-- Begin page content -->
<div class="container">
<div class="page-header">
<h1>Sticky footer</h1>
</div>
<p>page content</p>
</div>
<div id="push"></div>
</div><!-- end contentWrap -->
</div> <!-- end wrap -->
<div id="footer">
<div class="container">
<h3>sticky footer </h3>
</div>
</div>
CSS
#wrap{
background: url(http://is.gd/0QPvoC) left bottom; /* define image and position */
}
.contentWrap{
background-color:#fff; /* quick fix so background image is hidden behind main content */
}
I want to create alternating 100% colored blocks. An "ideal" situation is illustrated as an attachment, as well as the current situation.
Desired setup:
Currently:
My first idea was to create an div class, give it a background color, and give it 100% width.
.block {
width: 100%;
background: #fff;
}
However, you can see that this obviously doesn't work. It's confined to a container area. I tried to close the container and that didn't work either.
The container class is intentionally not 100% width. It is different fixed widths depending on the width of the viewport.
If you want to work with the full width of the screen, use .container-fluid:
Bootstrap 3:
<body>
<div class="container-fluid">
<div class="row">
<div class="col-lg-6"></div>
<div class="col-lg-6"></div>
</div>
<div class="row">
<div class="col-lg-8"></div>
<div class="col-lg-4"></div>
</div>
<div class="row">
<div class="col-lg-12"></div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
Bootstrap 2:
<body>
<div class="row">
<div class="span6"></div>
<div class="span6"></div>
</div>
<div class="row">
<div class="span8"></div>
<div class="span4"></div>
</div>
<div class="row">
<div class="span12"></div>
</div>
</body>
QUICK ANSWER
Use multiple NOT NESTED .containers
Wrap those .containers you want to have a full-width background in a div
Add a CSS background to the wrapping div
Fiddles: Simple: https://jsfiddle.net/vLhc35k4/ , Container borders: https://jsfiddle.net/vLhc35k4/1/
HTML:
<div class="container">
<h2>Section 1</h2>
</div>
<div class="specialBackground">
<div class="container">
<h2>Section 2</h2>
</div>
</div>
CSS: .specialBackground{ background-color: gold; /*replace with own background settings*/ }
FURTHER INFO
DON'T USE NESTED CONTAINERS
Many people will (wrongly) suggest, that you should use nested containers. Well, you should NOT.
They are not ment to be nested. (See to "Containers" section in the docs)
HOW IT WORKS
div is a block element, which by default spans to the full width of a document body - there is the full-width feature. It also has a height of it's content (if you don't specify otherwise).
The bootstrap containers are not required to be direct children of a body, they are just containers with some padding and possibly some screen-width-variable fixed widths.
If a basic grid .container has some fixed width it is also auto-centered horizontally.
So there is no difference whether you put it as a:
Direct child of a body
Direct child of a basic div that is a direct child of a body.
By "basic" div I mean div that does not have a CSS altering his border, padding, dimensions, position or content size. Really just a HTML element with display: block; CSS and possibly background.
But of course setting vertical-like CSS (height, padding-top, ...) should not break the bootstrap grid :-)
Bootstrap itself is using the same approach
...All over it's own website and in it's "JUMBOTRON" example:
http://getbootstrap.com/examples/jumbotron/
This is how you can achieve your desired setup with Bootstrap 3:
<div class="container-fluid">
<div class="row"> <!-- Give this div your desired background color -->
<div class="container">
<div class="row">
<div class="col-md-12">
... your content here ...
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
The container-fluid part makes sure that you can change the background over the full width. The container part makes sure that your content is still wrapped in a fixed width.
This approach works, but personally I don't like all the nesting. However, I haven't found a better solution so far.
There is a workaround using vw. Is useful when you can't create a new fluid container.
This, inside a classic 'container' div will be full size.
.row-full{
width: 100vw;
position: relative;
margin-left: -50vw;
left: 50%;
}
After this there is the sidebar problem (thanks to #Typhlosaurus), solved with this js function, calling it on document load and resize:
function full_row_resize(){
var body_width = $('body').width();
$('.row-full').css('width', (body_width));
$('.row-full').css('margin-left', ('-'+(body_width/2)+'px'));
return false;
}
In bootstrap 4, you can use 'w-100' class (w as width, and 100 as 100%)
You can find documentation here:
https://getbootstrap.com/docs/4.0/utilities/sizing/
If you can't change the HTML layout:
.full-width {
width: 100vw;
margin-left: -50vw;
left: 50%;
}
<div class="container">
<div class="row">
<div class="col-xs-12">a</div>
<div class="col-xs-12">b</div>
<div class="col-xs-12 full-width">c</div>
<div class="col-xs-12">d</div>
</div>
</div>
Demo: http://www.bootply.com/tVkNyWJxA6
Sometimes it's not possible to close the content container.
The solution we are using is a bit different but prevent a overflow because of the
firefox scrollbar size!
.full-width {
margin-top: 15px;
margin-bottom: 15px;
position: relative;
width: calc(100vw - 10px);
margin-left: calc(-50vw + 5px);
left: 50%;
}
Here is a example: https://jsfiddle.net/RubbelDeKatz/wvt9253q
Instead of
style="width:100%"
try using
class="col-xs-12"
it will save you 1 character :)
Sorry, should have asked for your css as well. As is, basically what you need to look at is giving your container div the style .container { width: 100%; } in your css and then the enclosed divs will inherit this as long as you don't give them their own width. You were also missing a few closing tags, and the </center> closes a <center> without it ever being open, at least in this section of code. I wasn't sure if you wanted the image in the same div that contains your content or separate, so I created two examples. I changed the width of the img to 100px simply because jsfiddle offers a small viewing area. Let me know if it's not what you're looking for.
content and image separate: http://jsfiddle.net/QvqKS/2/
content and image in same div (img floated left): http://jsfiddle.net/QvqKS/3/
I would use two separate 'container' div as below:
<div class="container">
/* normal*/
</div>
<div class="container-fluid">
/*full width container*/
</div>
Bare in mind that container-fluid does not follow your breakpoints and it is a full width container.
I'd wonder why someone would try to "override" the container width, since its purpose is to keep its content with some padding, but I had a similar situation (that's why I wanted to share my solution, even though there're answers).
In my situation, I wanted to have all content (of all pages) rendered inside a container, so this was the piece of code from my _Layout.cshtml:
<div id="body">
#RenderSection("featured", required: false)
<section class="content-wrapper main-content clear-fix">
<div class="container">
#RenderBody()
</div>
</section>
</div>
In my Home Index page, I had a background header image I'd like to fill the whole screen width, so the solution was to make the Index.cshtml like this:
#section featured {
<!-- This content will be rendered outside the "container div" -->
<div class="intro-header">
<div class="container">SOME CONTENT WITH A NICE BACKGROUND</div>
</div>
}
<!-- The content below will be rendered INSIDE the "container div" -->
<div class="content-section-b">
<div class="container">
<div class="row">
MORE CONTENT
</div>
</div>
</div>
I think this is better than trying to make workarounds, since sections are made with the purpose of allowing (or forcing) views to dynamically replace some content in the layout.
Though people have mentioned that you will need to use .container-fluid in this case but you will also have to remove the padding from bootstrap.
The following answer is not exactly optimal by any measure, but I needed something that maintains its position within the container whilst it stretches the inner div fully.
https://jsfiddle.net/fah5axm5/
$(function() {
$(window).on('load resize', ppaFullWidth);
function ppaFullWidth() {
var $elements = $('[data-ppa-full-width="true"]');
$.each( $elements, function( key, item ) {
var $el = $(this);
var $container = $el.closest('.container');
var margin = parseInt($container.css('margin-left'), 10);
var padding = parseInt($container.css('padding-left'), 10)
var offset = margin + padding;
$el.css({
position: "relative",
left: -offset,
"box-sizing": "border-box",
width: $(window).width(),
"padding-left": offset + "px",
"padding-right": offset + "px"
});
});
}
});
This must work (Mobile phone as well as Desktop screen):
class: alignfull and class: img-fluid will do the magic.
<div class="alignfull">
<img class="img-fluid" style="background-size: cover;
background-position: center ;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
height: auto;
min-width: 100%;
width: -moz-available; "
src="{{ $image->image }}" alt="An image">
</div>
I have a container div, inside which I want to pack a variable number of divs of unknown (variable) height but with a given min-width. My requirements are:
If the container is wide enough to accommodate two columns, I want them to distribute themselves nicely in two columns without unnecessary whitespace.
It not, they should just go above each other.
Currently, I've given the divs width:48% margin-right:2%;float:left; which works nicely in the one-column state but when I resize the browser window, making room for two columns, every div which ends up in the left column insists on aligning itself horizontally with the bottom of the last div which went to the right:
what I have http://img602.imageshack.us/img602/5719/whatihave.png
This is how I would like them to go (no wasted space):
what I want http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/6985/whatiwantu.png
I would like a pure CSS solution if possible.
Thank you! /Gustav
EDIT:
This markup illustrates my problem:
<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
.box {
width: 48%;
min-width:550px;
margin-right:2%;
margin-bottom: 1.5em;
background:blue;
color:white;
height:180px;
float:left;
}
.tall {
height: 250px;
}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div class="box">1</div>
<div class="box">2</div>
<div class="box">3</div>
<div class="box tall">4</div>
<div class="box">5</div>
<div class="box">6</div>
<div style="clear:both"/>
</body>
</html>
The .boxes are generated dynamically, and so are their heights, I just threw in one taller to illustrate.
I don't think you can achieve the desired effect with pure CSS. I've used jQuery Masonry to replicate the effect you're after and it worked really well.
I'd love to see a pure CSS solution for this but haven't seen anything come close yet.
I believe that if you have a div for each column into which you put the numbered divs you will get what you want. Something like this:
<div class="containerDiv">
<div class="column">
<div class="content">
1
</div>
<div class="content">
4
</div>
</div>
<div class="column">
<div class="content">
2
</div>
<div class="content">
3
</div>
</div>
</div>
The next step appears to be "how do I balance my columns". Some code somewhere is generating the boxes you mentioned. It is deciding on the height of each box. This code will need to generate a balanced list of boxes for each column prior to forwarding the request to the JSP for presentation. By balanced, I mean "the height of column1 is similar to the height to column2"