Considering the following DOM distribution. I have a flexbox container with two children, one of them has a fixed size while the other shrinks with an overflow: hidden. I was wondering, however, if there is a way for the overflown content to remain visible without any impact on the flow of the DOM.
Fleshed out Example at Codepen
ul.current {
list-style: none;
display: flex;
width: 40%;
margin: 0 auto;
}
li {
overflow: hidden;
}
li:last-child {
flex-shrink: 0;
}
li div {
border: 1px solid black;
background: green;
width: 10rem;
height: 10rem;
}
li:last-child {
margin-top: 2rem;
}
li:last-child div {
background: red;
}
/* GOAL */
section {
margin: 0 auto;
width: 40%;
}
.item {
position: absolute;
}
.item:last-child {
margin-top: 2rem;
margin-left: 5rem;
}
.content {
border: 1px solid black;
background: green;
width: 10rem;
height: 10rem;
}
.item:last-child .content {
background: red;
}
<h3>Shrink the viewport to get an idea of what's the intended scenario</h3>
<ul class="current">
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
</ul>
<h3>Visual representation of the overlap behavior</h3>
<section>
<div class="item"><div class="content"></div></div>
<div class="item"><div class="content"></div></div>
</section>
What I want, basically, is for the images to "overlap" each other in a flexible context, meaning, a solution that would work on N cases.
Your issue may be more clear to resolve if you didn't use quite as much inline style. I added classes and css to your code to make it easier to read.
By adding flex-wrap:wrap; to the display:flex; on the section, the images wrap. I set the images to background-images, and the bg-size to cover. If you wish the first-listed image to display second, simply switch the divs.
Hope this helps
#imagedisp {
display: flex;
flex-wrap: wrap;
}
#div1 {
flex-shrink: 1;
/* overflow: hidden;*/
border: 1px dashed;
background-image: url("https://s3-media4.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/xFlymSQW0weBqXjwZM6Y2Q/ls.jpg");
}
#div2 {
margin-bottom: 40px;
border: 1px dashed;
background-image: url("https://s3-media3.fl.yelpcdn.com/bphoto/_-U30Zk2XbUKe2fcdtEXLQ/o.jpg");
}
#div1,
#div2 {
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-position: center center;
background-size: cover;
}
div {
min-width: 300px;
/*width:300px;*/
height: 100px;
}
<section id="imagedisp">
<div id="div1">
<!-- <img />-->
</div>
<div id="div2">
<!-- <img />-->
</div>
</section>
In order to have an overlap you have to either use positioned elements (which is not the best solution if you want to keep the element in-flow) or use negative margin.
Let's consider negative margin. The trick is to find a way to adjust the margin in order to create the overlap when the parent container will shrink.
Here is a basic example:
section {
max-width: 300px;
border: 1px solid;
animation:change 2s linear infinite alternate;
}
#keyframes change {
from {max-width: 300px;}
to {max-width: 100px;}
}
.item{
height: 80px;
min-width: 80px;
background:blue;
display: inline-block;
vertical-align:top;
margin-right:calc((100% - 200px)/2);
}
.item:last-child {
margin-top: 2rem;
background: red;
}
<section>
<div class="item">
</div>
<div class="item">
</div>
</section>
As you can see, the trick is to define the margin considering the width of the container (100%) and we will have two cases:
When the width is bigger than Xpx we have a positive margin and a normal behavior with spacing
When the width is smaller than Xpx we will have a negative margin and will have the overlap effect without wrapping.
We need to simply find the good way to define the margin in order to obtain the needed behavior. We may also consider media query in case we want a different behavior like having no margin and then overlapping:
section {
border: 1px solid;
font-size:0;
}
.item{
height: 80px;
min-width: 80px;
background:blue;
display: inline-block;
vertical-align:top;
}
.item:nth-child(odd) {
margin-top: 2rem;
background: red;
}
#media all and (max-width:350px) {
.item{
margin-right:calc((100% - 320px)/4)
}
}
<section>
<div class="item">
</div>
<div class="item">
</div>
<div class="item">
</div>
<div class="item">
</div>
</section>
Another idea that work with nested element (like your intial code) is to keep the overflow visible and force the outer element to shrink using min-width:0.
ul.current {
list-style: none;
display: flex;
width: 40%;
margin: 0 auto;
animation:change 2s infinite linear alternate;
}
#keyframes change {
from {width:100%}
to {width:40%}
}
li {
min-width:0;
}
li div {
border: 1px solid black;
background: green;
width: 10rem;
height: 10rem;
}
li:nth-child(odd) {
margin-top: 2rem;
}
li:nth-child(odd) div {
background: red;
}
/* GOAL */
section {
margin: 0 auto;
width: 40%;
}
.item {
position: absolute;
}
.item:last-child {
margin-top: 2rem;
margin-left: 5rem;
}
.content {
border: 1px solid black;
background: green;
width: 10rem;
height: 10rem;
}
.item:last-child .content {
background: red;
}
<ul class="current">
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
</ul>
Related
I have created a dropdown menu. The basic process has been:
I put the dropdown link and submenus inside a div.
Using flexbox I put all the links inline and the submenus in a column.
With the visibility property I make the submenus appear.
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
.main_container {
width: 500px;
margin: 20px auto;
border: solid 2px green;
display: flex;
height: 400px;
}
div {
width: 110px;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
height: 40px;
}
a {
text-decoration: none;
color: white;
width: 90px;
text-align: center;
padding: 10px;
height: 40px;
background-color: red;
}
a {
flex-grow: 1;
}
div a {
width: 110px;
flex-grow: 0;
}
a:hover {
font-weight: bold;
background: blue;
}
.hidden {
visibility: hidden;
}
div:hover .hidden {
visibility: visible;
}
<nav class="main_container">
Enlace1
Enlace2
<div>
Enlace 3
Enlace 3.1
Enlace 3.2
Enlace 3.3
</div>
Enlace 4
</nav>
The key is to reduce the height of the div to 40px, because if you don't, hovering under "Link 3" will still cause the submenu to appear in a weird effect.
Well, when the div is reduced, in height, a value less than the height of the "Link 3" and submenus, curiously the height of these is reduced by 2px as you can see at the bottom of "Link 3".
Can this be avoided?
EDIT:
Changing your .hidden class to use the display property instead of visiblity is also a good idea here. visibility still allows the element to render and take up space on the page, which is why it can still be hovered why not visible. However, using display: none; makes it so the element does not render and cannot take up space on the page or be hovered.
Typically if you want to show/hide elements on a page you should use display: none;. visibility can have its uses, typically if you want there to an empty space/void where an element should be. Most of the time you actually want to use display instead.
Additionally, I added a :hover action to the div CSS so that it sets the height property to auto only when hovered. This avoids any unusual hover effects from the <div> taking up more space.
*{
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
box-sizing:border-box;
}
.main_container{
width:500px;
margin:20px auto;
border:solid 2px green;
display:flex;
height:400px;
}
div{
width:110px;
display:flex;
flex-direction:column;
height: 40px;
}
a{text-decoration:none;
color:white;
width:90px;
text-align:center;
padding:10px;
height:40px;
background-color:red;
}
a{flex-grow:1;}
div a{
width:110px;
flex-grow:0;
}
a:hover{
font-weight: bold;
background:blue;
}
.hidden{
display: none;
}
div:hover .hidden{
display: inline;
}
div:hover { height: auto; }
<nav class="main_container">
Enlace1
Enlace2
<div>
Enlace 3
Enlace 3.1
Enlace 3.2
Enlace 3.3
</div>
Enlace 4
</nav>
inside your css do this to your a element:
a {
text-decoration: none;
color: white;
width: 90px;
text-align: center;
padding: 10px;
background-color: red;
min-height: 40px;
max-height: 40px;
}
add a min-height and max-height and set it to 40px
You can try this. You need to use div {height:100%;}
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
.main_container {
width: 500px;
margin: 20px auto;
border: solid 2px green;
display: flex;
height: 400px;
}
div {
width: 110px;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
height: 100%;
}
a {
text-decoration: none;
color: white;
width: 90px;
text-align: center;
padding: 10px;
height: 40px;
background-color: red;
}
a {
flex-grow: 1;
}
div a {
width: 110px;
flex-grow: 0;
}
a:hover {
font-weight: bold;
background: blue;
}
.hidden {
visibility: hidden;
}
div:hover .hidden {
visibility: visible;
}
<nav class="main_container">
Enlace1
Enlace2
<div>
Enlace 3
Enlace 3.1
Enlace 3.2
Enlace 3.3
</div>
Enlace 4
</nav>
I was wondering how I can not see the orange background when there isn't enough in the to make the item-container overflow. So, if I put 4 divs in there, it wont over flow and you will see orange to the right, but if you add one more item to my example, a horizontal scrollbar will appear and cover the orange background on the right. I want the
item background to cover the whole item-container even if item-container doesn't have a scrollbar
Image with scrollbar
/* Copyright 2014 Owen Versteeg; MIT licensed */
body {
background: rgba(25, 25, 25, 255)
}
#header-text {
color: red;
text-align: center;
margin-top: 0;
margin-bottom: 0;
}
#header-text2 {
color: blue;
text-align: center;
margin-top: 0;
}
.item-container {
background: orange;
width: 418px;
height: 100px;
margin: 0 auto;
overflow-y: auto;
}
.item {
width: 100px;
height: 100px;
background: red;
display: inline-block;
}
<div class="container">
<h1 id="header-text">Hello</h1>
<h3 id="header-text2">Hello</h3>
<div class="item-container">
<div class="item">Item1</div><div class="item">Item1</div><div class="item">Item2</div><div class="item">Item2</div>
</div>
</div>
Simple, make your .item-container have no background:
.item-container {
width: 418px;
height: 100px;
margin: 0 auto;
overflow-y: auto;
}
Or have your items take up the full-width using flex like so:
.item-container{
background-color: red;
display: flex;
}
.item{
background-color: yellow;
flex-grow:1;
}
<div class="item-container">
<div class="item">Item1</div><div class="item">Item1</div><div class="item">Item2</div><div class="item">Item2</div>
</div>
Your layout is troublesome. Rather than pixel-perfect scrollbar gaps, why not set your inner blocks to 25% or use flexbox?
.item {
width: 25%;
...
}
I am trying to display a list of images (equal height) in a horizontally scrolling div. This much works, but when I want to have a fixed image - a "cover" image present leftmost inside container the layout gets screwed up.
Below is the CSS and HTML of my work. If you run the snippet you can see that the list jumps to next line, instead of staying adjacent to "cover" image and scrolling horizantally. Here is the jsfiddle - http://jsfiddle.net/6x66dLdy/
I can solve it using javascript by setting width of #list programmatically, but I want to do it with CSS alone if possible.
#container {
height: 120px;
background: #ccccff;
}
#cover {
height: 100px;
margin: 10px;
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: top;
position: relative;
}
#cover img {
border: 2px solid #cc0000;
}
#list {
overflow-x: scroll;
overflow-y: hidden;
white-space: nowrap;
height: 100px;
margin: 10px 0;
display: inline-block;
}
.item {
height: 80px;
margin: 10px 5px;
display: inline-block;
}
<div id="container">
<div id="cover">
<img src="http://placehold.it/160x100"/>
</div>
<div id="list">
<div class="item">
<img src="http://placehold.it/120x80"/>
</div>
<div class="item">
<img src="http://placehold.it/60x80"/>
</div>
<div class="item">
<img src="http://placehold.it/120x80"/>
</div>
<div class="item">
<img src="http://placehold.it/120x80"/>
</div>
<div class="item">
<img src="http://placehold.it/120x80"/>
</div>
</div>
</div>
This happening because you don't have widths specified. You have to provide widths for both of your inner divs and also to the container. Giving explicit width to container is advisable because you can then safely assign percent widths to children.
In you use-case, you have to calculate how much width is safer for your div#cover and then use the CSS calc to calculate the remainder of the width to assign to the list. Also, remember to account for the margins you have.
Relevant CSS:
width: calc(100% - 240px);
Your fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/abhitalks/6x66dLdy/1
It is always better to specify a proper box-sizing. So include this at the top of your CSS:
* { box-sizing: border-box; }
.
Float the #cover left and remove the display: inline-block from #list.
This will allow the cover image and images in the list be any unknown width. Setting a fixed width on the containers like the other answers would not allow this.
Fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/6x66dLdy/4/
#container {
height: 120px;
background: #ccccff;
}
#cover {
height: 100px;
margin: 10px;
float: left;
vertical-align: top;
position: relative;
}
#cover img {
border: 2px solid #cc0000;
}
#list {
overflow-x: scroll;
overflow-y: hidden;
white-space: nowrap;
height: 100px;
margin: 10px 0;
}
.item {
height: 80px;
margin: 10px 5px;
display: inline-block;
}
test this
http://jsfiddle.net/6x66dLdy/3/
#container {
height: 120px;
background: #ccccff;
width:1000px;
}
#cover {
height: 100px;
margin: 10px;
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: top;
position: relative;
width:200px;
float:left;
}
#cover img {
border: 2px solid #cc0000;
}
#list {
overflow-x: scroll;
overflow-y: hidden;
white-space: nowrap;
height: 100px;
margin: 10px 0;
width:600px;
float:left
}
.item {
height: 80px;
margin: 10px 5px;
display: inline-block;
}
To answer your question you can specify min-width:800px; for the id #container
so it does not jump down and stay beside the main picture
here is an example http://jsfiddle.net/6x66dLdy/5/
Before you roll your eyes and move on, I know how to solve this problem by using a fixed height and absolution positioning with top: and bottom:, but I want to solve it without using fixed heights. I want to learn more about CSS so I'm trying to solve this a different way.
I have set up a typical navbar running across the top, and then a scrolling content div below.
However! How do I fit the bottom scrolling div container to the remaining space without using absolute coordinates? I can't do position: absolute, because then I'd need to know the height of the navbar to set "top:". And I can't do "bottom: 0" because I'd have to specify a height.
Here's the JS filddle:
http://jsfiddle.net/8dugffz4/1/
The class of interest is ".result". I currently have the height fixed, which I don't want.
Thanks, y'all.
PT
CSS:
* {
font-family: Helvetica, Sans;
border: 0px;
margin: 0px;
padding: 0px;
}
.navBar {
width: auto;
overflow: auto;
border-bottom: 1px solid #bbb;
}
.pageBar {
float: right;
}
.pager {
cursor: pointer;
float: left;
border: 1px solid #bbb;
width: 2em;
height: 2em;
line-height: 2em;
text-align: center;
margin: 5px;
margin-left: 0px;
background: #eee;
color: #bbb;
}
.pager:hover {
background: #777;
border: 1px solid black;
color: white;
}
.fliph {
-ms-transform:scale(-1,1); /* IE 9 */
-moz-transform:scale(-1,1); /* Firefox */
-webkit-transform:scale(-1,1); /* Safari and Chrome */
-o-transform:scale(-1,1); /* Opera */
}
.results {
background: gray;
width: 100%;
height: 200px;
overflow: scroll;
}
.line {
height: 10em;
line-height: 10em;
border: 1px solid red;
}
HTML:
<body>
<div class='navBar'>
<div class='pageBar'>
<div class='pager'>◁</div>
<div class='pager'>1</div>
<div class='pager fliph'>◁</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class='results'>
<div class='line'>Line1</div>
<div class='line'>Line2</div>
<div class='line'>Line3</div>
<div class='line'>Line4</div>
</div>
</body>
Here's a solution that uses display: table and can actually achieve fluid heights:
http://jsfiddle.net/8dugffz4/8/
And a minimalistic snippet in case you want to see specifically what I did:
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
html,
body {
height: 100%;
}
#table {
display: table;
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
}
#table > div {
display: table-row;
}
#navbar {
height: 45px;
opacity: .5;
}
#navbar > div {
height: 100%;
background: black;
}
#results {
height: 100%;
}
#results > div {
height: 100%;
overflow: auto;
background: green;
}
<div id="table">
<div id="navbar">
<div></div>
</div>
<div id="results">
<div></div>
</div>
</div>
If you're just looking for an alternative to the position: absolute method, you could use the height: 100% method:
html, body { height: 100%; }
body { box-sizing: border-box; padding-top: 45px; }
.navBar { height: 45px; margin-top: -45px; }
.results { height: 100%; }
Like so: http://jsfiddle.net/8dugffz4/7/
I am trying to align these blocks so they are expandable, but also inline. But I can't seem to get them to maintain their own space correctly. The layout I am going for is as follows
Where box 2, and 3 are auto expanding to fill in space on whatever resolution is viewing.
JSFiddle and JSFiddle 2
CSS / HTML:
.container {
width: 75%;
min-width: 1005px;
max-width: 1428px;
height: 330px;
margin: 0 auto;
background-color: gray;
}
.box1 {
float: left;
width: 455px;
height: 250px;
background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.75);
margin-right: 5px;
margin-bottom: 5px;
}
.box2 {
float: left;
width: 75%;
min-width: 340px;
height: 250px;
background-color: rgba(100, 50, 50, 0.75);
margin-right: 5px;
margin-bottom: 5px;
}
.box3 {
float: left;
width: 25%;
min-width: 190px;
height: 250px;
background-color: rgba(50, 50, 100, 0.75);
margin-right: 5px;
margin-bottom: 5px;
}
.box4 {
display: block;
width: 100%;
height: 60px;
background-color: rgba(50, 100, 50, 0.75);
}
<div class="container">
<div class="box1">Test</div>
<div class="box2">Test</div>
<div class="box3">Test</div>
<div class="box4">Test</div>
</div>
Here are three techniques
"Show code snippet" and run to see the complete example.
#1 - display: inline-block and calc
Compatibility: IE 9 + and all modern browsers. There are workarounds to get this working with IE8+ if needed.
The margins and fixed column are removed from the percentage calculation with width: calc(50% - 60px)
The divs are given min-height: 100% and will re-size with content. This is possible thanks to
html,body { height: 100%; }
The inline gap is removed by placing the closing div tags right next to the next opening tag. More info here.
Example
Note: The child selectors can be replaced with class selectors if wanted.
html,
body {
height: 100%;
margin: 0;
}
div {
background: #f50057;
min-height: calc(50% - 5px);
width: calc(50% - 60px);
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: top;
margin-right: 10px;
}
/*Fix first div*/
div:first-child {
width: 100px;
}
/*Remove third divs right margin*/
div:nth-child(3) {
margin: 0;
}
/*Top margin for last div*/
div:last-of-type {
width: 100%;
display: block;
margin: 10px 0 0;
}
<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div>
#2 - display: table / display: table-cell
Compatibility: IE 8 + and all modern browsers
The top three divs are wrapped in a div with display: table
The top three divs are given display: table-cell
The fixed left div is given a fixed width
To allow the "cells" to evenly spread out the available width, the wrapper is given table-layout: fixed
The spacing between the top three divs is given by the border property. This is calculated into the percentage calculation thanks to * { box-sizing: border-box }
The bottom div is outside the wrapper and is given display: block. It is given a top border to create the faux margin
Example
* {
box-sizing: border-box;
}
html,
body {
height: 100%;
margin: 0;
background: #000;
}
.table {
display: table;
height: 50%;
width: 100%;
table-layout: fixed;
border-collapse: collapse;
}
.table > div {
background: #f50057;
display: table-cell;
border-left: solid 10px #FFF;
}
.table > div:first-child {
border-left: none;
width: 100px;
}
.footer {
width: 100%;
display: block;
background: #f50057;
height: 50%;
border-top: solid 10px #FFF;
}
<div class="table">
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
</div>
<div class="footer"></div>
#3 - The future! display: flex
Compatibility: IE 11, all modern browsers and Safari (with -webkit- prefix)
This is my favourite! Mainly due to the fact that I created it in about 3 minutes.
The top three divs are wrapped in a container with display: flex
The first div is given its fixed pixel width and flex: 0 0 auto. This tells the div not to grow or shrink
The 2 flexible divs are given flex: 1 and will grow and shrink as needed; automatically ignoring the fixed column
The last div is outside the flex container and is independent
The height and widths of the flexible divs are created with viewport width (vw) and viewport height (vh) units.
Refer here for a fantastic flexbox guide.
Example
* {
box-sizing: border-box;
}
body {
margin: 0;
}
.flex {
display: flex;
height: 50vh;
width: 100vw;
}
.flex > div {
background: #f50057;
flex: 1;
margin-left: 10px;
}
.flex > div:first-child {
width: 100px;
flex: 0 0 auto;
margin: 0;
}
.footer {
width: 100%;
display: block;
background: #f50057;
height: calc(50vh - 10px);
margin-top: 10px;
}
<div class="flex">
<div></div>
<div></div>
<div></div>
</div>
<div class="footer"></div>
Its not perfect but seems to do what you want with css tables.
<div class="table">
<div class="trow">
<div class="tcell">box1</div>
<div class="tcell">box2</div>
<div class="tcell">box3</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="table">
<div class="tcell last">box4</div>
</div>
.table{display:table; width:100%; text-align:center;}
.tcell{display:table-cell; background:#000; color:#fff; min-height:100px; padding:20px; border:1px solid #fff; }
.trow{display:table-row; }
.last{ background:red; }
.trow .tcell:first-child{ width:300px; }
http://jsfiddle.net/fjsvnrLp/5/
You dont actually need the row