I want what in the good old days would be a two-column table layout. It's for http://paulisageek.com/resume and is working perfectly with:
.dates {
float:right;
width:171px;
}
but I'm sure I'll break the sizes on updates (and different fonts, and browsers, and font-sizes, etc).
Is there a way to make the second column autosize without forcing a width (or using javascript)? Will CSS3 have a way?
Give your dates column a min-width and a max-width instead of a fixed width. This gives you flexibility but ensures your design won't break:
.dates {
float:right;
min-width:171px;
max-width:300px;
}
Note that min-width and max-width do not include padding, borders, or margins.
Another possibility is make the dates to align right and display inline:
.dates p{
text-align:right;
display:inline;
}
This way you won't need a separate div for the dates.
...Or, if you want to be super-cutting-edge and ensure that your layout breaks in IE, you can use the new CSS3 columns (not recommended here, but still worth reading)
What you've got here is something that works extraordinarily well and easily with tables. Not only that it's incredibly backwards compatible. In "pure" CSS it's hard. You can make one of the columns variable width but not both. If you really need that, stick with tables (irrespective of what the semantic HTML zealots might say).
Yup, it's possible. The keyword to search for is liquid columns. For example this deals with whole layouts but the points are the same.
Related
Normally, when we want to have multiple DIVs in a row we would use float: left, but now I discovered the trick of display:inline-block
Example link here.
It seems to me that display:inline-block is a better way to align DIVs in a row, but are there any drawbacks? Why is this approach less popular then the float trick?
In 3 words: inline-block is better.
Inline Block
The only drawback to the display: inline-block approach is that in IE7 and below an element can only be displayed inline-block if it was already inline by default. What this means is that instead of using a <div> element you have to use a <span> element. It's not really a huge drawback at all because semantically a <div> is for dividing the page while a <span> is just for covering a span of a page, so there's not a huge semantic difference. A huge benefit of display:inline-block is that when other developers are maintaining your code at a later point, it is much more obvious what display:inline-block and text-align:right is trying to accomplish than a float:left or float:right statement. My favorite benefit of the inline-block approach is that it's easy to use vertical-align: middle, line-height and text-align: center to perfectly center the elements, in a way that is intuitive. I found a great blog post on how to implement cross-browser inline-block, on the Mozilla blog. Here is the browser compatibility.
Float
The reason that using the float method is not suited for layout of your page is because the float CSS property was originally intended only to have text wrap around an image (magazine style) and is, by design, not best suited for general page layout purposes. When changing floated elements later, sometimes you will have positioning issues because they are not in the page flow. Another disadvantage is that it generally requires a clearfix otherwise it may break aspects of the page. The clearfix requires adding an element after the floated elements to stop their parent from collapsing around them which crosses the semantic line between separating style from content and is thus an anti-pattern in web development.
Any white space problems mentioned in the link above could easily be fixed with the white-space CSS property.
Edit:
SitePoint is a very credible source for web design advice and they seem to have the same opinion that I do:
If you’re new to CSS layouts, you’d be forgiven for thinking that
using CSS floats in imaginative ways is the height of skill. If you
have consumed as many CSS layout tutorials as you can find, you might
suppose that mastering floats is a rite of passage. You’ll be dazzled
by the ingenuity, astounded by the complexity, and you’ll gain a sense
of achievement when you finally understand how floats work.
Don’t be fooled. You’re being brainwashed.
http://www.sitepoint.com/give-floats-the-flick-in-css-layouts/
2015 Update - Flexbox is a good alternative for modern browsers:
.container {
display: flex; /* or inline-flex */
}
.item {
flex: none | [ <'flex-grow'> <'flex-shrink'>? || <'flex-basis'> ]
}
More info
Dec 21, 2016 Update
Bootstrap 4 is removing support for IE9, and thus is getting rid of floats from rows and going full Flexbox.
Pull request #21389
While I agree that in general inline-block is better, there's one extra thing to take into account if you're using percentage widths to create a responsive grid (or if you want pixel-perfect widths):
If you're using inline-block for grids that total 100% or near to 100% width, you need to make sure your HTML markup contains no white space between columns.
With floats, this is not something you need to worry about - the columns float over any whitespace or other content between columns. This question's answers have some good tips on ways to remove HTML whitespace without making your code ugly.
If for any reason you can't control the HTML markup (e.g. a restrictive CMS), you can try the tricks described here, or you might need to compromise and use floats instead of inline-block. There are also ugly CSS tricks that should only be used in extreme circumstances, like font-size:0; on the column container then reapply font size within each column.
For example:
Here's a 3-column grid of 33.3% width with float: left. It "just works" (but for the wrapper needing to be cleared).
Here's the exact same grid, with inline-block. The whitespace between blocks creates a fixed-width space which pushes the total width beyond 100%, breaking the layout and causing the last column to drop down a line.
Here' s the same grid, with inline-block and no whitespace between columns in the HTML. It "just works" again - but the HTML is uglier and your CMS might force some kind of prettification or indenting to its HTML output making this difficult to achieve in reality.
If you want to align the div with pixel accurate, then use float. inline-block seems to always requires you to chop off a few pixels (at least in IE)
You can find answer in depth here.
But in general with float you need to be aware and take care of the surrounding elements and inline-block simple way to line elements.
Thanks
There is one characteristic about inline-block which may not be straight-forward though. That is that the default value for vertical-align in CSS is baseline. This may cause some unexpected alignment behavior. Look at this article.
http://www.brunildo.org/test/inline-block.html
Instead, when you do a float:left, the divs are independent of each other and you can align them using margin easily.
First up, for extreme clarity, here a JS fiddle demonstrating what I'm trying to achieve:
http://jsfiddle.net/bb_matt/VsH7X/
Here's the explanation - my rationale:
I'm creating a responsive site using the 1140 grid framework.
It's a fairly complex layout.
I've created a re-usable simple gallery class which can drop into any defined column size & using media queries, I apply relevant percentage widths to the li elements.
Each of the li elements has a right margin of 5%.
I'm using nth-child(xn+x) in the media queries to remove the right margin at the end of each row.
Everything works well - images resize as the layout resizes, the number of gallery items in a row work as I've defined based on percentages.
The only remaining issue to fix is to clear between rows.
I can't add additional html markup and I want to steer clear of overly complex jquery fixes.
I know of two ways to fix this, but I'm not keen on either of them.
First fix, simply using display: inline-block on the li elements, with a vertical align of top, would flow everything correctly... however, all the percentages get shot and the gallery items no longer neatly fit in the allocated space.
Second fix, give the list items a height. This is the route I will go down if necessary - it will require a different height depending on the resolution - no big deal, but not as neat.
I updated your fiddle here: http://jsfiddle.net/VsH7X/5/
I added a clear: left to the first item in each new row.
ul.gallery li:nth-child(5n+6) {
clear: left;
}
Keep in mind that the :nth-child pseudo class does not work in IE6-8, or FF3 and under.
I'm looking into creating a set of css grid classes for webkit only browsers. Should be simillar to blueprit/bootstrap/compass, however I'd rather not use those because they rely on float positioning.
I'd like something like this:
span-1 {width:10%;display:inline-block}
span-2 {width:20%;display:inline-block}
and so on. Would there be any benefit to using display:table-cell vs inline-block for this? Or is there a better approach?
Actually display: table is really the solution you are probably looking for (because of your target browsers). It was added to browsers so people could get a grid layout without needing to use a table. You don't even need percentages (the number of columns you add will dictate the width of the children elements).
DEMO
The only real caveat comes in when you are doing mobile browsers and want a dynamic layout shift (media tag) to go from a horizontal list to a vertical list. I guess it is not too big of a deal to add you own media tags (and add a class to the wrapper)...
You probably could get display: inline-block working but make sure you use box-sizing: border-box because when you are working with percentages, even a single px off and things start wrapping..
I have several divs on a page that all have the same width but different heights. They are all in one div, the #note1PreviewDiv. They all share the class .note, which has the following css code (among other):
.note{
width: 160px;
padding: 10px;
margin: 10px;
background: #e3f0ff;
float: left;
}
I thought with float: left; they would all automatically align so that they are well aligned among each other.
Here's a preview of what it looks like:
Current state http://posti.sh/img/ist.png
And here's what the positioning should be like:
Desired state http://posti.sh/img/soll.png
I think you get the idea. Somehow it seems to me the height of the leftmost div pushes the other divs in the second row to the right - but that's only guessing.
Thanks for your help!
Charles
You're not going to be able to do this easily with CSS only.
CSS3 has a new feature called column layout, but browser support is not great. IE9 and below don't support it.
See http://designshack.net/articles/css/masonry/ and the last example for CSS3 solution.
Have a look at these js / jQuery options for easier implementation and browser support:
masonry
isotope
vanilla masonry which doesn't need jQuery.
wookmark
The kind of lay out you want is really difficult (not possible?) without going for a column based approach and adding additional block elements to represent each column. This obviously won't work with a flexible number of columns if you want a dynamic layout based on screen size.
That said, you could always use JavaScript to dynamically place elements into columns, and get it to match the screen size.
Is the height of the parent container given a fixed value? If it is, try setting the height of the parent container to auto, and the overlow propery to hidden.
I have a list of items that I am displaying in a floated list, with each item in the list at a fixed width so that there's two per row. What is the best practice to prevent this horrible thing from happening:
alt text http://x01.co.uk/floated_items.gif
Possibilites:
Trim to a specified number of characters before displaying the data. Requires guesswork on how many characters will be "safe".
Overflow: hidden. Hacky.
Remove the background and just have a top border on each item.
Possible but silly:
Have a scrollbar in each item by doing overflow: auto, this will look horrendous.
Add a background image to the container. It's not guaranteed that there's always an equal number of items so this option is out.
Any help on this irritating issue appreciated!
Are you using a fixed font size, i.e. specified in px? If not you also need to consider the various text size options of each browser which is probably going to make the concept of trimming the string redundant. If it is fixed then perhaps seeing how many Ws you can fit in and restricting your text to that -3 and appending an ellipsis, not sure what this list is for so that's one approach.
Personally I'd probably use overflow:hidden as that covers all eventualities and ensures that it'll always keep your layout consistent.
I guess the last option would be to keep a tight control over what can be added to the list and prevent the problem occuring in the first place. Prevention better than cure as they say, although probably unhelpfully.
There are scripts that help with this by comparing the li in blocks of two and making them both equal to the tallest.
Usually, rather than thinking what's best from a css point of view though, you should consider what presentation you want, then get the css/JavaScript to get you to your desired effect.
If this is something that you're just wanting out of the way, consider using a gradient background image that highlights the top of the li and suggests the block without actually filling it in.
Adding link to a jQuery solution: Equalize
One solution would be to have a alpha-based PNG that would slowly fade the text to the backgroundcolor of your container, on the last 10px or so. That would look good if some text are considerebly shorter than the long ones, however in the case where the text would be equal to the container it could look kinda silly.
Of course, in combination with display: hidden and white-space: no-wrap
From an accessibility point of view it's not a good idea to simply hide the title, since that could hide content on people who increase font sizes due to bad eyesight. Your design should be able to float when hit by bad resolutions or similar obstructions, even if it floats into something less pleasing to the eye.
Now if I understand your issue with the background image correctly, I believe your problem could be solved using the techniques describes in the ALA article on sliding doors, where the background image expands with the content.
Here's some controversy for you.. use a table?
Sounds like you have a grid of data to me, would a table answer this problem for you?
It also raises the question, do you actually want the items to be the same height, or just have the same amount of black background behind them? You could apply the black to the row's background, then create the centre white separator with borders and margins.
You could try using:
ul li{
display:block;
float:left;
width:6em;
height:4em;
background-color:black;
color:white;
margin-right:1em;
}
ul{
height:100%;
overflow:hidden;
}
div{
height:3em;
overflow:hidden;
background-color:blue;
}
Don't know about cross browser consistensy though.
EDIT: This is the html I'm assuming:
<div>
<ul>
<li>asdf
<li>asdf trey tyeu ereyuioquoi
<li>fdas dasf erqwt ytwere r
<li>dfsaklñd s jfañlsdjf ñkljdk ñlfas
<li>ksdflñajñldsafjñlksdjfñalksdfjlkdhfc,v.mxzn
</ul>
</div>