how to toggle div with another div - html

How do I solve this using css.
When I expand the contents in menu menu expand like second picture. This is my css
.contents {
/*margin-left: 165px;*/
/*margin-top: 60px;*/
position: absolute;
top: 120px;
left: 0px;
right: 0px;
bottom: 0px;
overflow-y: scroll;
}
and this is my html with contents.
<div class="contents" id="subContents">
</div>
I tried with position 'relative' but it doesn't works for me.
By using z-index there's a problem like this.
http://jsfiddle.net/ssaranga/o7sh1j0f/

One way of doing it is to add the z-index property to your toggle menu class and assign the highest value to it, according to how many stacked elements you have.
z-index specifies the stack order of an element. Different browsers have different max-min values.
The advantage of using a number larger than the actual stacked elements is that you don't have to go back and change the z-index value when you want to add more elements.
Note that z-index only works on positioned elements.
For example, you could do something like:
.toggle-menu{
position:relative
z-index: 999;
}

The positioning is not your problem, it's the fact that your menu div is shown in the background.
You have html elements stacked on top of each other, and will have to work with the CSS z-index propert to adjust the element on the z-axis.

Related

Controlling the z-index in CSS to make a play icon [duplicate]

So if I understand z-index correctly, it would be perfect in this situation:
I want to place the bottom image (the tag/card) below the div above it. So you can't see the sharp edges. How do I do this?
z-index:-1 // on the image tag/card
or
z-index:100 // on the div above
doesn't work either. Neither does a combination of anything like this. How come?
The z-index property only works on elements with a position value other than static (e.g. position: absolute;, position: relative;, or position: fixed).
There is also position: sticky; that is supported in Firefox, is prefixed in Safari, worked for a time in older versions of Chrome under a custom flag, and is under consideration by Microsoft to add to their Edge browser.
If you set position to other value than static but your element's z-index still doesn't seem to work, it may be that some parent element has z-index set.
The stacking contexts have hierarchy, and each stacking context is considered in the stacking order of the parent's stacking context.
So with following html
div { border: 2px solid #000; width: 100px; height: 30px; margin: 10px; position: relative; background-color: #FFF; }
#el3 { background-color: #F0F; width: 100px; height: 60px; top: -50px; }
<div id="el1" style="z-index: 5"></div>
<div id="el2" style="z-index: 3">
<div id="el3" style="z-index: 8"></div>
</div>
no matter how big the z-index of el3 will be set, it will always be under el1 because it's parent has lower stacking context. You can imagine stacking order as levels where stacking order of el3 is actually 3.8 which is lower than 5.
If you want to check stacking contexts of parent elements, you can use this:
var el = document.getElementById("#yourElement"); // or use $0 in chrome;
do {
var styles = window.getComputedStyle(el);
console.log(styles.zIndex, el);
} while(el.parentElement && (el = el.parentElement));
There is a great article about stacking contexts on MDN
Your elements need to have a position attribute. (e.g. absolute, relative, fixed) or z-index won't work.
In many cases an element must be positioned for z-index to work.
Indeed, applying position: relative to the elements in the question would likely solve the problem (but there's not enough code provided to know for sure).
Actually, position: fixed, position: absolute and position: sticky will also enable z-index, but those values also change the layout. With position: relative the layout isn't disturbed.
Essentially, as long as the element isn't position: static (the default setting) it is considered positioned and z-index will work.
Many answers to "Why isn't z-index working?" questions assert that z-index only works on positioned elements. As of CSS3, this is no longer true.
Elements that are flex items or grid items can use z-index even when position is static.
From the specs:
4.3. Flex Item Z-Ordering
Flex items paint exactly the same as inline blocks, except that order-modified document order is used in place of raw
document order, and z-index values other than auto create a stacking context even if position is static.
5.4. Z-axis Ordering: the z-index property
The painting order of grid items is exactly the same as inline blocks, except that order-modified document order is
used in place of raw document order, and z-index values other than auto create a stacking context even if
position is static.
Here's a demonstration of z-index working on non-positioned flex items: https://jsfiddle.net/m0wddwxs/
Make sure that this element you would like to control with z-index does not have a parent with z-index property, because element is in a lower stacking context due to its parent’s z-index level.
Here's an example:
<section class="content">
<div class="modal"></div>
</section>
<div class="side-tab"></div>
// CSS //
.content {
position: relative;
z-index: 1;
}
.modal {
position: fixed;
z-index: 100;
}
.side-tab {
position: fixed;
z-index: 5;
}
In the example above, the modal has a higher z-index than the content, although the content will appear on top of the modal because "content" is the parent with a z-index property.
Here's an article that explains 4 reasons why z-index might not work:
https://coder-coder.com/z-index-isnt-working/
Z-index needs these to work:
Position: relative, absolute, fixed, ..
Make sure that the parent element hasn't overflow: hidden;
I have had the same problem with z-index
and you believe me or not it's fixed just by setting the background color
like this
background-color: white;
If all else fails, look for syntax errors in your HTML. It's not intuitive, but I've seen it be the reason why z-index doesn't work.
The following code has invalid HTML syntax:
<div class="over"/>
<div class="under"/>
...(it's is invalid syntax because a div isn't a self closing tag).
CSS properties that were applied to these rogue HTML elements, such as background-color: black, position: fixed, width: 150px, and top:150px, were all working as expected. However, the z-index: 2 property wasn't working under the exact same conditions.
Only when the invalid HTML was fixed did the z-index work correctly.
I'm not sure why z-index was pickier than the other CSS attributes, but maybe this answer can help someone.
In my case I had my Navbar's opacity to 0.9, I got my answer from codercoder.com, as I removed the opacity property from my Navbar's css, z-index worked
just give position other that static. And u should give both container a position than it will work.

How do you change the z-index of list items in an unordered list on hover? [duplicate]

So if I understand z-index correctly, it would be perfect in this situation:
I want to place the bottom image (the tag/card) below the div above it. So you can't see the sharp edges. How do I do this?
z-index:-1 // on the image tag/card
or
z-index:100 // on the div above
doesn't work either. Neither does a combination of anything like this. How come?
The z-index property only works on elements with a position value other than static (e.g. position: absolute;, position: relative;, or position: fixed).
There is also position: sticky; that is supported in Firefox, is prefixed in Safari, worked for a time in older versions of Chrome under a custom flag, and is under consideration by Microsoft to add to their Edge browser.
If you set position to other value than static but your element's z-index still doesn't seem to work, it may be that some parent element has z-index set.
The stacking contexts have hierarchy, and each stacking context is considered in the stacking order of the parent's stacking context.
So with following html
div { border: 2px solid #000; width: 100px; height: 30px; margin: 10px; position: relative; background-color: #FFF; }
#el3 { background-color: #F0F; width: 100px; height: 60px; top: -50px; }
<div id="el1" style="z-index: 5"></div>
<div id="el2" style="z-index: 3">
<div id="el3" style="z-index: 8"></div>
</div>
no matter how big the z-index of el3 will be set, it will always be under el1 because it's parent has lower stacking context. You can imagine stacking order as levels where stacking order of el3 is actually 3.8 which is lower than 5.
If you want to check stacking contexts of parent elements, you can use this:
var el = document.getElementById("#yourElement"); // or use $0 in chrome;
do {
var styles = window.getComputedStyle(el);
console.log(styles.zIndex, el);
} while(el.parentElement && (el = el.parentElement));
There is a great article about stacking contexts on MDN
Your elements need to have a position attribute. (e.g. absolute, relative, fixed) or z-index won't work.
In many cases an element must be positioned for z-index to work.
Indeed, applying position: relative to the elements in the question would likely solve the problem (but there's not enough code provided to know for sure).
Actually, position: fixed, position: absolute and position: sticky will also enable z-index, but those values also change the layout. With position: relative the layout isn't disturbed.
Essentially, as long as the element isn't position: static (the default setting) it is considered positioned and z-index will work.
Many answers to "Why isn't z-index working?" questions assert that z-index only works on positioned elements. As of CSS3, this is no longer true.
Elements that are flex items or grid items can use z-index even when position is static.
From the specs:
4.3. Flex Item Z-Ordering
Flex items paint exactly the same as inline blocks, except that order-modified document order is used in place of raw
document order, and z-index values other than auto create a stacking context even if position is static.
5.4. Z-axis Ordering: the z-index property
The painting order of grid items is exactly the same as inline blocks, except that order-modified document order is
used in place of raw document order, and z-index values other than auto create a stacking context even if
position is static.
Here's a demonstration of z-index working on non-positioned flex items: https://jsfiddle.net/m0wddwxs/
Make sure that this element you would like to control with z-index does not have a parent with z-index property, because element is in a lower stacking context due to its parent’s z-index level.
Here's an example:
<section class="content">
<div class="modal"></div>
</section>
<div class="side-tab"></div>
// CSS //
.content {
position: relative;
z-index: 1;
}
.modal {
position: fixed;
z-index: 100;
}
.side-tab {
position: fixed;
z-index: 5;
}
In the example above, the modal has a higher z-index than the content, although the content will appear on top of the modal because "content" is the parent with a z-index property.
Here's an article that explains 4 reasons why z-index might not work:
https://coder-coder.com/z-index-isnt-working/
Z-index needs these to work:
Position: relative, absolute, fixed, ..
Make sure that the parent element hasn't overflow: hidden;
I have had the same problem with z-index
and you believe me or not it's fixed just by setting the background color
like this
background-color: white;
If all else fails, look for syntax errors in your HTML. It's not intuitive, but I've seen it be the reason why z-index doesn't work.
The following code has invalid HTML syntax:
<div class="over"/>
<div class="under"/>
...(it's is invalid syntax because a div isn't a self closing tag).
CSS properties that were applied to these rogue HTML elements, such as background-color: black, position: fixed, width: 150px, and top:150px, were all working as expected. However, the z-index: 2 property wasn't working under the exact same conditions.
Only when the invalid HTML was fixed did the z-index work correctly.
I'm not sure why z-index was pickier than the other CSS attributes, but maybe this answer can help someone.
In my case I had my Navbar's opacity to 0.9, I got my answer from codercoder.com, as I removed the opacity property from my Navbar's css, z-index worked
just give position other that static. And u should give both container a position than it will work.

How can I make my dropdown menu blocks center aligned under the parent item block?

I have been trying to edit my dropdown menu so that the sub-items are centered beneath the parent items. I finally achieved the centering only to find that every time I hovered over a parent item to reveal the drop down menu, the rest of the menu fell to the bottom of the dropdown menu.
Here is the link to the sample, it has all the coding on one side. Thank you in advance for your help! I am just starting out with CSS and HTML and no matter how many videos and tutorials I watch and read, I just can't seem to get it right :(
https://www.w3schools.com/code/tryit.asp?filename=FEEMWLIFAMAO
Try to add vertical-align: top; to your .dropdown css like so:
CSS
.dropdown {
vertical-align: top;
}
Also on a separate note I would remove the width on .dropdown-content and instead put the width on .dropdown to make sure they are both the same width and no wacky horizontal position changes on hover. Another solution is to make the dropdowns position: absolute; and position them relative to the links. But off-topic :)
You could set the dropdown-content's position to absolute. To center the dropdowns, you have to position them relative to the parent's width. This would look something like this in your .dropdown:hover .dropdown-content {:
display: block;
position: absolute;
left: calc((100% - 150px)/2);
width: 150px;
text-align: center;
To explain the positioning a little further:
100% refers to your parent's width. Take the difference of this and the 150px you specified as the width of your dropdown-content. Since you want your box centered below the menu button, this difference has to be divided between the left and right side, hence you have a padding of (100% - 150px) / 2 on each side.
Both the parent element and the child element you are trying to position relatively to said parent have the position: relative property applied to their styling, which is inappropriate for the result you seem to be trying to achieve.
Have a read on the css position property and its values.
Explanation: your child element is being displayed as a block, which by definition occupies a horizontal space on its own, while being positioned relative to its parent element, therefore pushing the rest of the latter adjacent navigation elements under said parent element.
Solution: The navigation effect you seem to be trying to achieve is generally done by positioning the subnavigation absolutely, relative to the navigation element that makes it appear on hover: its parent. This way said subnavigation does not affect the positioning of the elements where it is hierarchically placed inside the html code.
CSS:
.dropdown:hover .dropdown-content {
position: absolute;
display: block;
width: 150px;
text-align: center;
//To position the element:
top: 100%;
left: 50%;
transform: translateX(-50%);
}

Why button is overlapping with div?

I have a main wrapper div with a content div and a button. The button is supposed to go underneath the content div but for some reason it's overlapping with it.
The content div has css:
#groupMembers {
position: absolute;
height: 50%;
width: 90%;
left: 5%;
overflow: scroll;
display: inline-block;
}
and the button has:
button {
display: inline-block;
width: 70%;
left: 15%;
}
I thought since they're both inline-block that they wouldn't overlap, but for some reason they are. I made a JsFiddle to show: http://jsfiddle.net/b5hp6boz/
Can anybody help me get the button to display beneath the content div?
Remove the (extensive) use of absolute positioning.... Change it to position: relative; if necessary. But on many elements even that is not necessary.
Move the button div up to under the <h4>add members</h4> in the HTML where you appear to want it.
Then adjust margins for #DIV_05 and the button.
Fiddle Update or Fiddle Update 2
(Note I merely performed a search to change absolute to relative in your CSS, then adjusted from there.)
By using absolute positioning so extensively you were forcing elements into unnatural positions. Then when it wasn't working out.. you are left wondering why. Let things fall where they naturally want to fall. Change the HTML for overall render order, don't force things with absolute positioning.
Use of absolute position is most commonly used to adjust z-index and make elements not alter positioning of other elements. (like a global float of sorts) It should not be the fall back for positioning everything in any layout.
The problem in your code is that you have given the #DIV_5 the following CSS:
position: absolute;
By giving a HTML element an absolute position it is removed from the normal rendering process by not obtaining any space in the document. That means it is not affecting the position of the following BUTTON_105 element. That's why the button is positioned right underneath the H4_4 element (which is the first element not having an absolute position).
To fix that simply remove the position: absolute; declaration for #DIV_5. (Btw: You should try not to make heavy use of absolute positioning as it can cause further issues.)
Try giving your div tag a higher z-index value.

Using bottom with position relative?

I am trying to get a series of <a> tags appear at the base of their parent <li>.
The problem is two fold. If I use position: relative, bottom: 0; has no effect. If I use position: absolute, the <li>'s have overlapping widths.
I can fix the first problem by using the top style, but this is not ideal as the text size is unknown, and the top element measure from the top of both elements (so the base of the element would not hit the base unless I knew the font size).
I can fix the second with defined widths, but this will add unwanted white space on elements with shorter titles.
Here is a JSFiddle of the issue.
Try this bit of CSS:
#main-menu li a{
display: table-cell;
position: relative;
vertical-align: bottom;
height: 111px;
}
jsFiddle of the working style
Add a line-height value to your "#main-menu li a" style and position accordingly, 200px should work.