I have a div, .instagram_grid which has margin-left and margin-right set to auto, is relatively positioned, and has a width which for browse sizes 900px >makes the div be centered nicely in the page.
when I have the simple structure in the context of the rest of the CSS for a single page, the no longer becomes centered at browser width >1684px. In the Fiddle that follows I only have two lines that modify the div as a whole (and one just sets the background to pink). There are no media queries present, which suggests that it is the effect of some unseen preceding div/element causing the behavior.
https://jsfiddle.net/ebbnormal/m561tpnL/6/
The behaviour is what is expected with that markup.
The element is centered, but then you use relative positioning to show it 500px to the right of where it actually would be.
The .calc-text div above the .instagram_grid div causes its parent to overflow by setting margin-left:auto while simultaneously setting left: to a negative value, which isn't valid CSS.
Related
I'm specifying a div inside of a td tag. As soon as I specify the width of the div in pixels, in addition to that width Chrome shows a huge right margin and I don't understand why. I'm curious if anyone can help me make sense of this.
This js example shows the exact problem:
https://playcode.io/625077/
But with no width specified, there's no mysterious margin:
https://playcode.io/625261/
Also, there appears to be a ratio at play: for every 1 pixel of width that I specify on the div, I get several pixels of mystery right margin.
Update: even hard setting the margin and padding of the div to 0 seems to have no effect, leaving the remaining margin in place:
All div has a default margin and padding. Your div inside a tb element is doing that. If you remove this div tag and let "test" stay just inside your tb element, the "test" string will touch the right side of the page.
Playing with the default tb style, you'll see that it tries to split the total width given (100%) equally between all tb elements inside a tr element. Doing so there is no space for a default div element which doesn't have this same property to be fit and also has a specific margin. The result of a div element inside a tr element is getting it longer than usual.
I'm trying to center an absolute div and at the same time also set the width of this div, but apparently only one these two things is possible at the same time. I've managed to center the absolute div rather painlessly, but setting a min-width adds this useless horizontal scrollbar for no reason: https://jsfiddle.net/pietertje1/ze7472ge/
The weird thing is, if I stretch the div to its desired width by adding in a single line of characters, it behaves perfectly.
anyone any idea how to fix this?
It looks like your min-width rule is causing this. Expand your fiddle output window and you'll see it go away. If you need that min-width you can target elements and apply overflow rules to them. For example
body {
overflow-x: hidden;
}
JSFiddle Link - your example with this rule
Edit
Per discussion, if you simply wish to center an element, apply the following margin rule
margin : 0 auto;
Updated JSFiddle
I have overflow-x:hidden placed on the body tag of my page so that any content extending beyond the window will not be visible. No scroll bars show up, however, I can still scroll to the left / right to see the content (kinda defeats the purpose of overflow-x).
-ms-overflow-x: doesn't fix the problem either.
There is a wrapper 900px;
Inside the wrapper, there is a div inside:
width:100%;
padding-right:300px;
position:absolute;
left:200px;
I would like the inner div to hang over the right side of the window without causing it to scroll (and leaving a 200px space the its left).
Any help? Thanks!
Since the width of the div is 100%, there should never be an overflow, since the div will always fit 100% of the viewport (assuming you haven't changed the size of your body tag).
As for the padding, the padding is added on after the width, so you're saying the div is 100% of the width of it's container (the body tag), and the padding is an additional 300px to the right, which will be invisible as it's out of the viewport.
You might want to try giving the div an explicit size width and experiment that way.
It may help to see an example of your markup as well, to get an idea of what you're trying to achieve.
More HTML/CSS would be useful, but given what you have right now, my first thought is that your wrapper is still set to position: static (the default for HTML elements).
If you add position: relative to your wrapper, it will contain the absolutely-positioned element within it, and should constrain it to the overflow restrictions.
Additionally, you may want to look into the box-sizing property and how the W3C box model works. In short, your padding is adding to the width of the element, so it's actually (100% + 300px), which results in a size that is larger than the container.
If you don't want to mess with box-sizing, you can also add max-width: 100% to your absolute div to force it to not grow out of its container.
I have a div that shows some text and is absolutely positioned on a page. While it is absolutely positioned the div is just large enough to show the text it contains. When I add an inline style to that div to change it to be relatively positioned, the width of the div suddenly expands to take up 100% of the page...
I used the Chrome dev tools to toggle the relative position on/off. Turning it off causes the width to be correct, turning it back on causes the div to expand. It is an inline style so there isn't any CSS class or selector that is changing the width on me.
I experience the same issue in Firefox. Removing position: relative in Firebug causes the width to shrink back down to be just wide enough to fit the text.
If you want relative position DIV take his content width then you can give float, display:inline or display:inline-block to your DIV
could you please post the HTML and CSS, and I could have a look at it..
Meanwhile you might wanna have a look at
Position an HTML element relative to its container using CSS
and see if that could possibly help you?
to change size as content grows/shrinks use something like:
<div style="min-height:30px;max-height:300px;">
Which will mean it'll vary between 30 and 300 px depending on content
or
<div style="min-height:30px;height:auto;">
which will vary between 30px and as big as its container will allow (so forever, essentially)
I'm trying to make a box with rounded corners where the height and width of the div depends on the content, so it's automatically adjust to it...
You can see the example here: http://pastehtml.com/view/1duizyf.html
The problem is that i can't get the "test_mid_left" (black background) and "test_mid_right" (turquoise background) to inherit the height from the "test_mid_center" (green background). I have tried height: 100% and auto, but none of thoose work. So how do I get them to inherit the height from the content?
(The reason why I have used "min-height: xx" in the left and right content on the example is just to show which boxes I am talking about)
As already mentioned this can't be done with floats, they can't inherit heights, they're unaware of their siblings so for example the side two floats don't know the height of the centre content, so they can't inherit from anything.
Usually inherited height has to come from either an element which has an explicit height or if height: 100%; has been passed down through the display tree to it.. The only thing I'm aware of that passes on height which hasn't come from top of the "tree" is an absolutely positioned element - so you could for example absolutely position all the top right bottom left sides and corners (you know the height and width of the corners anyway) And as you seem to know the widths (of left/right borders) and heights of top/bottom) borders, and the widths of the top/bottom centers, are easy at 100% - the only thing that needs calculating is the height of the right/left sides if the content grows -
This you can do, even without using all four positioning co-ordinates which IE6 /7 doesn't support
I've put up an example based on what you gave, it does rely on a fixed width (your frame), but I think it could work with a flexible width too? the uses of this could be cool for those fancy image borders we can't get support for until multiple background images or image borders become fully available.. who knows, I was playing, so just sticking it out there!
proof of concept example is here
The Problem
When an element is floated, its parent no longer contains it because the float is removed from the flow. The floated element is out of the natural flow, so all block elements will render as if the floated element is not even there, so a parent container will not fully expand to hold the floated child element.
Take a look at the following article to get a better idea of how the CSS Float property works:
The Mystery Of The CSS Float Property
A Potential Solution
Now, I think the following article resembles what you're trying to do. Take a look at it and see if you can solve your problem.
Equal Height Columns with Cross-Browser CSS
I hope this helps.
The negative margin trick:
http://pastehtml.com/view/1dujbt3.html
Not elegant, I suppose, but it works in some cases.
You need to take out a float: left; property... because when you use float the parent div do not grub the height of it's children... If you want the parent dive to get the children height you need to give to the parent div a css property overflow:hidden;
But to solve your problem you can use display: table-cell; instead of float... it will automatically scale the div height to its parent height...
Most of the times, the Previous parent has a heigt manually set, so you can use that value as reference, no other dirty tricks will be needed, and if the number is not the same for any reason maybe a comment can be added with the original number so in case you need to change it, by searching at the all the values, this one can be adjusted or even changed, in the time someone resolve this one for us.