How do I set a center container to stay responsive? - html

Question

I have three containers (div), the third div has a set width but I need the other two to be responsive. Current html setup:
<div id="page-type">
<div id="type-container">
<div>
<p id="type-title">Events</p>
</div>
</div>
<div class="type-options">
</div>
<div id="type-back">
Back to Explore
</div>
</div>
Current css:
#page-type {
float: left;
width: 100%;
background: #D2D3D5;
height: 60px;
}
#type-container {
float: left;
width: auto;
}
#type-options {
height: 60px;
width: auto;
overflow: hidden;
}
#type-back {
border-left: 1px #BDBEC1 solid;
float: right;
width: 160px;
}
I can get type-container and type-options to be on the same line and responsive but I can't keep type-back on the same line.
visual example:
----- EDIT -----
To clarify more:
type-container adjusts to fit it's content
type-back is a set width
type-option fills in the space between type-container and type-back regardless of content
type-containerand type-options fill up the whole row pushing type-back to the next line. I need type-back to stay to the right of the line while the other two are responsive.

Answer 1

Put a wrapper around your first two columns and then you can use CSS3's calc().
#wrapper {
width: calc(100% - 161px); /* extra px for 1px border */
float: left;
}
Demo here
IE8 Workaround - Use border-box:
#wrapper {
margin-right: -161px;
padding-right: 161px;
width: 100%;
-moz-box-sizing: border-box;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
IE8 Demo

Answer 2

In CSS3 you can use calc(X% - 160px) to reduce the width of a percentage based container by a number of pixels.
A quick example could be: http://jsfiddle.net/e3vC4/

Answer 3

There isn't a need to use calc for this, even though its a nice feature to have (+1) — sadly its support is still patchy in places and despite much research it's still difficult to say exactly which browser versions will work as expected (fine if you assume all modern browser users auto-upgrade however).
Depending on what your prerequisites are, you have two other options that I'm aware of:
1. Position absolute the last column
This is a simple solution, however something to be wary of is that certain older mobile devices may treat position absolute in odd ways.
In order to get this to work, all you need to do is place position: relative on your container, and position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; on your third column... and to keep the centering of your central column correct, add margin-right: 161px.
Pos. Abs. example on JSFiddle
CSS ~ markup is as per your example
#page-type {
display: block;
position: relative; /* added */
width: 100%;
background: #D2D3D5;
height: 60px;
overflow: hidden;
}
#type-container {
display: block;
float: left;
text-align: center;
}
#type-options {
display: block;
height: 100%;
text-align: center;
overflow: hidden;
margin-right: 161px; /* added */
}
#type-back {
display: block;
position: absolute; /* added */
right: 0; /* added */
top: 0; /* added */
border-left: 1px #BDBEC1 solid;
width: 160px;
height: 100%;
}
2. Float right, and/or left, before sibling without hasLayout / shrinkwrap
This works on the basis that a floated element takes up space in the document, and a block element, by default, auto-expands to fill the remaining area that it can — as long as it hasn't been forced to rigidly define its edges with the likes of float, overflow or other hasLayout or shrinkwrap tricks.
This option is only open to you if you can re-arrange your DOM ordering i.e. place #type-back before #type-options. This won't affect the visual order, but it makes a big difference to how the layout is calculated, and is one of the reasons why you were encountering problems with your attempts. You need to have the floated elements in place before leaving the other elements to calculate their dimensions.
Float example on JSFiddle
NOTE: Changing the order of DOM elements can be of benefit, but it can also be a hindrance; it all depends on what the markup is, and who will be viewing it. For example, sometimes having actionable links higher up the DOM can be useful to tabbing and screen-reader users, but the opposite can also be true depending on the context.
MARKUP ~ note the rearranged DOM order
<div id="page-type">
<div id="type-container">
<p id="type-title">Events</p>
</div>
<div id="type-back">
<p>Back to Explore</p>
</div>
<div id="type-options">
<p>Options</p>
</div>
</div>
CSS
#page-type {
display: block;
width: 100%;
background: #D2D3D5;
height: 60px;
overflow: hidden;
}
#type-container {
display: block;
float: left;
text-align: center;
}
#type-options {
display: block;
height: 100%;
text-align: center;
overflow: hidden;
}
#type-back {
float: right;
border-left: 1px #BDBEC1 solid;
width: 160px;
height: 100%;
}
NOTE: It should be stated this version does break on to the next line when "responsed" down to a very minimal size. However, I tend to prefer to design items to disappear when space is tight, and this method lends well to that thinking.
Summary
These are just two other possible options. If you are developing for a progressive client, or yourself, then I personally would stick with the calc method. It's easier to work out what is going on, and far easier for a future developer to change.
However, sometimes often frequently all the blasted time clients want to support the widest range of devices possible (without investing the extra time and money that would be required), and in this instance you are better off with an alternative method (one that isn't going to randomly break on a manager's less than contemporary laptop, running IE 7.5? or 8.33333??? or even Netscape 4.7¿).
Unless of course, you have any leeway to fight for using the more progressive approach, which does seem to be getting easier of late.

Answer 4

I sat down with the designer for more clarification and to discuss alternate solutions. I'm making the third did responsive as well allowing me to use two containers: one holds page-type and type-options set to x% and another holds type-back set to y%. Doing this allows me to keep all elements responsive.