Ok, so I have a class that modifies the looks for a specific type of anchor that I'm using, but the problem is that the browsers keep adding the 30 pixels of padding that I have set onto the defined 100% width, so it's stretching out past the box which the anchor is located in.
div.box div div div a.option_line {
cursor: pointer;
display: block;
font-weight: normal;
min-height: 30px;
padding: 0px 10px 0px 20px;
text-align: justify;
width: 100%;
}
Can anyone think of a way to make the anchor stay within the boundaries of the box?
Just take out the width: 100%, as the a is declared to be a block level element, it will stretch to the maximum width available without going over.
Remove the width:100%; that caused the issue, since you already set the display to 'block' the width:100% isn't necessary because block elements occupies the available width of the container
Related
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;
Id like to know why my inner wrap of the desktop css for this site is not working.
Basically if set innerwrap to margin:0 auto; and width: auto; there is no problem, but it's not centered on the footer or main div
When I have innerwrap as it's currently set margin:0 auto; and width:960px; you'll notice that the page presents a horizontal scroll bar after resizing the window a bit, and all the content is squished to the left with a white background starting to become visible.
Is there anyway to have it transition fluidly to the next tablet size layout without have a scroll bar appearing and content getting squished?
It shows Scrollbar because of the padding you apply in .innerwrap
Read this article about the Box Model
Use of padding on the sides of certain elements when applying 100% width to parent element its not recommendable because it adds width to the whole group, and since you,re using the browsers width it shows the scrollber to see the extra space you added.
My humble advice is that if you want a block element to appear centered apply an margin:auto style rule whenever is possible, the same also has to be displayed as a block element with no float.
Remove this:
.innerwrap {
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: auto;
padding-left: 10%;
padding-right: 10%;
width: 80%;
}
Keep This
.innerwrap {
margin: auto;
width: 960px;
}
Since you are applying fixed margins for you social icons they will show misplaced, so don't use fixed margins for centering them, use percentage width instead.
you may want use a common class for aligning them
.social {
background-position: center center;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
display: block !important;
float: none;
height: 150px;
margin: auto;
padding-top: 50px;
width: 30% !important;
}
For a.twittersocial and a.twittersocial:hover and the rest of the social links just keep the background properties.
Create a determined class if you need to apply common style rules to several elements (if there are many of them) and avoid usage of ID selectors whenever is possible, use classes instead (.daclass).
Use a web inspector like Firebug to track down styling errors.
Good luck Developer!
I need to create a dialog box using custom images created by a designer. For purposes of this discussion, this the correct answer for my application. The dialog box must be able to withstand changes in width and height. This is easy to do with a table, but I want to maintain a table-less design, so I figured that I could do this using 3 rows of DIV's. For example, float an image to the left, float an image to the right, and put a DIV in between then with the image set to the background so that text can be entered over it.
Here is demo of my failed attempt to do this: (just one row shown)
http://www.seaburydesign.com/rounded/demo.html
As you can see, this almost working. But the DIV in the middle is only the size of the content inside of it, even though I have set the height and width. I need to keep the width flexible.
Any ideas on how to fix this?
Remove the following line:
display:inline;
Besides being useless in this case (the inline behavior is already working because of the floats) "inline" property doesn't allow you to set the element's width or height. For a clearer understanding, read w3c's article.
If you make the rounded corners of your images white instead of transparent, you can apply the background-image to the header-tag instead of the middle div. This will create the impression that the middle div has the same height as both images.
Update
If possible (depending on what browsers you need to support), you could do rounded corners with CSS3's border-radius property, instead of using images. That would be something like:
header {
-webkit-border-top-left-radius: 10px;
-webkit-border-top-right-radius: 10px;
-moz-border-radius-topleft: 10px;
-moz-border-radius-topright: 10px;
border-top-left-radius: 10px;
border-top-right-radius: 10px;
}
You could also try this border-radius CSS-generator to find the properties that suit you best.
The css display: inline in your container div's voids any setting for width. Use display: block; float: left; margin: 0 XXpx; for your div (with XX being the width of the images on the sides).
Edit:
Concretely this would be:
div#yourdiv {
background-image: url("images/module_header_bg.jpg");
color: white;
display: block;
float: left;
font-weight: bold;
height: 42px;
width: auto;
}
and both img tags
img {
float: left;
}
This creates a dynamic sized box for your content, or you set width of the div to a specific value like width: 300px instead of width: auto.
Let's say I have a CSS DIV that holds formatted syntax code. The DIV is set to a min-width:100; and a max-width:100;
This same DIV has another CSS declaration for when the DIV is Hovered, max-width: 135% !important; and min-width: 135%;
So if the DIV holding the formated code is wider then the DIV's width, it shows a scroll bar and when you hover over the DIV it expands the DIV to the width of the code not to exceed 135%, if the DIV's code does not exceed the width of the DIV then the DIV stays the same width.
My problem, is that when a div exceeds the 100% width, it expands to the width of the code inside but stays LESS then 135%, is there a way to make it expand to 135% even if the code is not 135% but is over 100%?
Hopefully this makes sense
I almost need some kind of conditional statement that says...
If DIV contents are > 100% then make DIV 135% on Hover otherwise leave DIV at 100%
Is this even possible?
Here is my full CSS
.syntax {
min-width: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
margin: 1em 0 1em 0;
position: relative;
overflow-y: hidden;
overflow-x: auto;
font-size: .9em;
display:inline-block;
}
.syntax:hover {
max-width: 135% !important;
min-width: 135%;
}
I'm not sure I'm getting waht you mean, but if I'm not mistaken, all you're leaving aside is this:
min-width: 135% !important;
you may need to adjust overflow depending on what you need
A better option would be to use fixed sizes, but if you're working on adaptive layout environments guess that is a no go
I'm hoping for a solution, but worst case scenario, an explanation of why my div isn't resizing, and it may be because I'm using a nav tag.
I have the following html. When the content within my 'section' tag grows, so does the div with the class of page-content. However, when my nav menu items increases, the div doesn't resize.
<div class="page-content">
<nav>
<ul>{menu items here}</ul>
</nav>
<section id="main">
{bunch of text here}
</section>
</div>
Here is my css.
.page-content
{
display: block;
position:relative;
width: 100%;
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: auto;
background-image: url(images/bg-home-main.jpg);
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-position: center;
}
nav {
display: block;
float: left;
padding: 15px;
position: relative;
margin: 0px 0px 0px -45px;
}
#main {
padding: 5px 25px 5px 25px;
margin-left: 175px;
}
The problem I have then is that the div has a background image that should cover the background of the both the nav and section areas. However, this only happens if my section area is larger (top to bottom) than my nav, as the div will stretch to accommodate the section size. However, if my nav area is bigger, it actually expands outside of the div and there for the image.
When you float an element, you take it out of the flow, and it won't
expand it's containing element. One workaround to this is to add
overflow: hidden; to the containing element.
Using overflow: hidden; is a form of clearfix - a fix to cause the containing element to expand to show any floated, contained elements. Actually any value of overflow works, but overflow: auto causes scrollbars in Explorer on Mac (not sure if anyone still actually uses that) and overflow: scroll causes scrollbars which is the same issue. For some versions of IE, you also need to include a width value to cause this to work. There are other clear fixes, usually involving inserting some kind of element after the floated element that clears that floated element, also causing the containing element to expand to contain it - a div with no height but clear applied to it, or using the :after pseudo element, but I usually use overflow as it doesn't add any presentational markup.