Vertical Auto Margin within a Div - html

I'm now trying another strange and not working thing: the vertical auto alignment of a child div.
I would like the content to be vertically centered within the panel, because the panel have a height in % that fits the window size, it's really important for me to have a strict alignment.
All right, here's my code: JSFiddle
HTML
<div id="panel">
<div id="content">
</div>
</div>
CSS
html, body
{
height: 100%;
background-color: #273034;
margin: 0;
}
#panel
{
height: 100%;
width: 380px;
margin: auto;
background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0.3);
}
#content
{
height: 100px;
width: auto;
background-color: rgba(117,169,56,0.9);
}
Why a so simple thing doesn't work?
Hope someone could help me, I've tried these solutions: margin : auto not working vertically? but it actually didn't make the trick

Here is a simple Solution for vertical aligning, using Pure CSS without fixing any top-margin, top-padding. so its totally responcive.
See this Working Fiddle
HTML: (Same)
<div id="panel">
<div id="content">
</div>
</div>
CSS:
html, body
{
height: 100%;
background-color: #273034;
margin: 0;
}
#panel
{
height: 100%;
width: 380px;
margin: 0 auto;
background-color: rgba(255,255,255,0.3);
}
/*this is new*/
#panel:before
{
content: '';
height: 100%;
margin-left: -5px;
vertical-align: middle;
display: inline-block;
}
#content
{
vertical-align: middle; /*this is new*/
display: inline-block; /*this is new*/
height: 100px;
width: 100%; /*this is new*/
background-color: rgba(117,169,56,0.9);
}

Related

How to make two large divs stay side by side, and take up same width at all screen widths [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Two divs, one fixed width, the other, the rest
(10 answers)
Closed 4 years ago.
So I am making a website that uses this setup. A nav, a panel, and a main content area. The content area is filled with divs that will be resized by media queries. The issue is I want the panel to be a fixed width, and the main area to take up the rest of the screen on all screen sizes and automatically downsize. Example. If the panel's 255px width is 25% of the screen, I want the width of main to be the next 75% of the screen. It either takes up too much space and makes it scroll horizontally, or goes down to the new line. What would be the best solution
.panel {
width: 255px;
height: 100%;
position: relative;
float: left;
background-color: orange;
}
.main {
width: 88%;
height: 100%;
position: relative;
float: left;
background-color: red;
}
.nav {
width: 100%;
height: 300px;
background-color: yellow;
}
<div class="panel">
T
</div>
<div class="main">
<div class="nav">
T
</div>
T
</div>
LINK- https://jsfiddle.net/cn6q6keu/2/
You can do it with float and flex.
Here is a float solution:
*{
margin: 0;
border: 0;
padding: 0;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
html, body{
height: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
}
.clear-fix:before, .clear-fix:after{
display: block;
content: '';
clear: both;
}
#main{
height: 100%;
}
.panel, .nav{
float: left;
padding: 15px;
height: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
overflow: auto;
}
.panel{
background: pink;
width: 225px;
}
.nav{
background: red;
width: calc(100% - 225px);
}
<div id="main" class="clear-fix">
<div class="panel"></div>
<div class="nav"></div>
</div>
Fiddle link: https://jsfiddle.net/3rxdub8d/5/
Here is a flex solution:
*{
margin: 0;
border: 0;
padding: 0;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
html, body{
height: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
}
#main{
display: flex;
height: 100%;
}
.panel, .nav{
padding: 15px;
height: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
overflow: auto;
}
.panel{
background: pink;
width: 225px;
}
.nav{
background: red;
flex: 1;
}
<div id="main" class="clear-fix">
<div class="panel"></div>
<div class="nav"></div>
</div>
Fiddle link: https://jsfiddle.net/xxwsa4oh/2/
I'm afraid you're gonna have to apply this rule to the fixed width, so you'll be able to convert it to a relative unit like %:
(target ÷ context) * 100 = result
Target = panel fixed width;
Context = parent element width;
Result = Converted fixed width value in percentage.

Confusion with height:auto [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Why doesn't the height of a container element increase if it contains floated elements?
(7 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
In the following scenario I do not understand why the height of the elements wrapper and content are not set correctly even though they are set to height: auto, meaning that the 2 divs with the class wrap are not displayed inside the wrapper and content divs.
I recreated the problem in this JSfiddle:
http://jsfiddle.net/202oy3k8/
The As you can see the two orange divs are not displayed inside the wrapper divs, even though the wrapper height is set to auto. What is causing this problem and how can I fix it?
HTML CODE:
<div id="wrapper">
<div id="content">
<div id="top">
</div>
<div class="dash"></div>
<p id="header">Header</p>
<div class="wrap">
</div>
<div class="wrap">
</div>
</div>
</div
CSS CODE:
html, body {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
}
#wrapper {
background-color: black;
margin-top: 2%;
width: 100%;
height: auto;
}
#content {
background-color: green;
width: 1224px;
height: auto;
margin: auto;
text-align: center;
}
#top {
background-color: pink;
height: 400px;
width: 60%;
margin: auto;
}
.dash {
width: 80%;
margin: auto;
margin-bottom: 1%;
height: 2px;
background-color: black;
}
p#header {
margin: 0;
text-align: center;
}
.wrap {
background-color: orange;
margin: 1%;
float:left;
width: 48%;
height: 400px;
}
You have to add a clear property to clear left float you have applied to .wrap divs.
What are float and clear for?
If you look in a typical magazine you’ll see images illustrating the
articles, with the text flowing around them. The float property in CSS
was created to allow this style of layout on web pages. Floating an
image—or any other element for that matter—pushes it to one side and
lets the text flow on the other side. Clearing a floated element means
pushing it down, if necessary, to prevent it from appearing next to
the float. Although floating was intended for use with any elements,
designers most commmonly use it to achieve multi-column layouts
without having to abuse table markup.
html,
body {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
}
#wrapper {
background-color: black;
margin-top: 2%;
width: 100%;
height: auto;
}
#content {
background-color: green;
width: 400px;
height: auto;
margin: auto;
text-align: center;
}
#top {
background-color: pink;
height: 400px;
width: 60%;
margin: auto;
}
.dash {
width: 80%;
margin: auto;
margin-bottom: 1%;
height: 2px;
background-color: black;
}
p#header {
margin: 0;
text-align: center;
}
.wrap {
background-color: orange;
margin: 1%;
float: left;
width: 48%;
height: 400px;
}
.clear {
clear: left;
}
<div id="wrapper">
<div id="content">
<div id="top"></div>
<div class="dash"></div>
<p id="header">Header</p>
<div class="wrap"></div>
<div class="wrap"></div>
<div class="clear"></div>
</div>
</div
Reference: w3.org - Floats and clearing - CSS-Tricks - What is "Float"?

Negative Margins and Floats in IE9

I'm trying to accomplish a 3 column fluid layout with an additional span at the bottom that covers the last 2 columns. In addition, I need to use source ordering so that the middle column is actually the first column in the markup.
I have an example fiddle working in chrome/safari/firefox here: http://jsfiddle.net/66krg9cr/6/
<div class="container">
<div class="middle">
<div style="height: 400px;"></div>
</div>
<div class="left">
<div style="height: 600px;"></div>
</div>
<div class="right">
<div style="height: 200px;"></div>
</div>
<div class="bottom"></div>
</div>
* {
box-sizing: border-box;
}
.container {
max-width: 90%;
margin: auto;
overflow: hidden;
}
.middle {
width: 48.59114%;
float: left;
margin-left: 25.70443%; // push toward the middle
margin-right: 2.81771%;
background: #000;
}
.left {
background: #333;
margin-left: -77.11328%; // pull towards the left
width: 22.88672%;
float: left;
}
.right {
background: #666;
width: 22.88672%;
float: right;
height: 200px;
margin-bottom: -9999px; // equal height column trick
padding-bottom: 9999px;
}
.bottom {
background: #999;
width: 77.11328%; // width of the last two columns combined
float: right;
height: 200px;
}
Unfortunately, I can't get this working correctly with IE9. In that browser, the bottom 2 column span drops below the bottom of the first column instead of being beside it. It seems the problem is the source ordering. If I change the order in the HTML to match the visual layout, then IE behaves. It's like IE remembers the height of the first column before it's moved left, and lays out the bottom span according to that height.
I would move the HTML around and just solve the problem, but it's going through a rigorous accessibility/screen reader review, and i know I would get dinged for not having the main content at the top of the source code.
Also, content in these divs will be dynamic in production, so I can't rely on knowing the height of any one column.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Why not stray away from negative margins and break the whole thing up into wrappers like this:
HTML:
<div class="container">
<div class="container-main">
<div class="top">
<div></div>
<div></div>
</div>
<div class="bottom"></div>
</div>
<div class="container-left">
<div class="left"></div>
</div>
</div>
CSS:
* {
box-sizing: border-box;
}
.container {
position: relative;
width: 90%;
margin: auto;
overflow: hidden;
}
.container-main {
position: relative;
float: right;
width: 77%;
margin: 0;
min-height: 100%;
}
.container-left {
position: relative;
float: left;
width: 23%;
margin: 0;
min-height: 100%;
}
.container-main .top {
width: 100%;
min-height: 400px;
}
.container-main .top > div:first-child {
width: 70%;
float: left;
background: #000;
height: 400px;
}
.container-main .top > div:last-child {
background: #666;
width: 30%;
float: right;
height: 400px;
}
.container-main .bottom {
background: #999;
width: 100%;
height: 200px;
}
.container-left .left {
background: #333;
width: 100%;
height: 600px;
}
Your main content is still at the top. If you don't have to have everything in one wrapper then this may work, I can't test it in older IE versions though, but you can give it a try and let me know!
Here is a Fiddle of the above in action: http://jsfiddle.net/egxfnjzL/
...and just for fun, here is an exact copy of what you had: http://jsfiddle.net/whkqnnyg/

Vertical align multiple elements inside parent

I've been search for more than a day a way to vertical align my fluid designed header so without knowing font-size nor spesific pixels my 3 divs will be the same height and the content inside them in the same line.
Here is an fiddle example of what I have now so you might understand what i need better.
And this is the code:
HTML:
<div id="container">
<div id="header">
<div id="menu">
<a href="#">
<img src='http://s16.postimg.org/uwgkp15r5/icon.png' border='0' alt="icon" />
</a>
</div>
<div id="title">
My site title
</div>
<div id="my_button">
<button id="button">My button</button>
</div>
<div style="clear: both;"></div>
</div>
<div id="content"></div>
</div>
CSS:
html,body {
height: 100%;
font-size: 2vmin;
}
#container {
height: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
}
#header {
height: 20%;
padding: 2vmin 0 2vmin 0;
box-sizing: border-box;
background: #000000;
width: 100%;
}
#menu{
background: #5f5f5f;
float: left;
width: 20%;
text-align: center;
}
#title {
background: #aaaaaa;
height: 100%;
float: left;
font-size: 3vmin;
width: 60%;
text-align: center;
}
div#my_button {
background: #cccccc;
float: right;
width: 20%;
}
button#button {
color: #aaaaaa;
border: none;
}
#content {
height: 70%;
width: 100%;
background: #eeeeee;
}
You can use :after pseudo element for solving your problem.
add this after #header styles in your CSS
#header:after{
height: 100%;
width: 1px;
font-size: 0px;
display: inline-block;
}
Then remove floats from #menu, #title and #my_buttun div's and apply
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: middle;
The inline-block will create small gaps between these div, but if you're not apply background colors to them , then it is ok.
Last: make #my_button width: 19%;
Look here: http://jsfiddle.net/D22Ln/5/
If you mean the three horizontal divs, setting height: 100%; for all of them will do the trick. From there you just modify the size of their parent element (currently at 20%) and they will adapt automatically.
http://jsfiddle.net/D22Ln/2/
If I have understood you correctly this is maybe what you are looking for, I just copied that I have done earlier. But test it out: http://jsfiddle.net/6aE72/1/
By using wrapper and a helper you will have the left and right div same size as middle and helper helps with vertical alignment
#wrapper { display: table; width: 100%; table-layout: fixed; position: absolute; top: 0;}
.content { display: table-cell; }
This FIDDLE might help you. I've used bootstrap framework. Re-size the RESULT grid.

Why is width: 100% not working on div {display: table-cell}?

I'm trying to vertically and horizontally center some content overlaying an image slide (flexslider). There were some similar questions to this one, but I couldn't find a satisfactory solution that applied directly to my specific problem. Because of the limitations of FlexSlider, I cannot use position: absolute; on the img tag in my implementation.
I almost have workaround below working. The only problem is I cannot get the width & height declarations to work on inner-wrapper div with the display: table-cell property.
Is this standard behavior, or am I missing something with my code? If it's standard behavior, what's the best solution to my problem?
HTML
<ul>
<li>
<img src="#">
<div class="outer-wrapper">
<div class="inner-wrapper">
<h1>My Title</h1>
<h5>Subtitle</h5>
</div>
</div>
</li>
</ul>
CSS
html, body {
margin: 0; padding: 0;
width: 100%; height: 100%;
}
ul {
background: #CCC;
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
list-style-position: outside;
margin: 0; padding: 0;
}
li {
width: 100%;
display: table;
}
img {
width: 100%;
height: 410px;
}
.outer-wrapper {
position: absolute;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
top: 0;
margin: 0; padding: 0;
}
.inner-wrapper {
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: middle;
text-align: center;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
Note: the centered content will be more than 1 element, so I can't use the line-height trick.
jsFiddle.
Putting display:table; inside .outer-wrapper seemed to work...
JSFiddle Link
EDIT: Two Wrappers Using Display Table Cell
I would comment on your answer but i have too little rep :( anyways...
Going off your answer, seems like all you need to do is add display:table; inside .outer-wrapper (Dejavu?), and you can get rid of table-wrapper whole-heartedly.
JSFiddle
But yeah, the position:absolute lets you place the div over the img, I read too quickly and thought that you couldn't use position:absolute at all, but seems like you figured it out already. Props!
I'm not going to post the source code, after all its 99% timshutes's work, so please refer to his answer, or just use my jsfiddle link
Update: One Wrapper Using Flexbox
It's been a while, and all the cool kids are using flexbox:
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; justify-content: center; align-items: center;">
stuff to be centered
</div>
Full JSFiddle Solution
Browser Support (source): IE 11+, FireFox 42+, Chrome 46+, Safari 8+, iOS 8.4+ (-webkit- prefix), Android 4.1+ (-webkit- prefix)
CSS Tricks: a Guide to Flexbox
How to Center in CSS: input how you want your content to be centered, and it outputs how to do it in html and css. The future is here!
I figured this one out. I know this will help someone someday.
How to Vertically & Horizontally Center a Div Over a Relatively Positioned Image
The key was a 3rd wrapper. I would vote up any answer that uses less wrappers.
HTML
<div class="wrapper">
<img src="my-slide.jpg">
<div class="outer-wrapper">
<div class="table-wrapper">
<div class="table-cell-wrapper">
<h1>My Title</h1>
<p>Subtitle</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
CSS
html, body {
margin: 0; padding: 0;
width: 100%; height: 100%;
}
ul {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
list-style-position: outside;
margin: 0; padding: 0;
}
li {
width: 100%;
display: table;
}
img {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.outer-wrapper {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
position: absolute;
top: 0;
margin: 0; padding: 0;
}
.table-wrapper {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
display: table;
vertical-align: middle;
text-align: center;
}
.table-cell-wrapper {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: middle;
text-align: center;
}
You can see the working jsFiddle here.
I discovered that the higher the value of 'width' is, the smaller the box width is made and vice versa. I found this out because I had the same problem earlier. So:
.inner-wrapper {
width: 1%;
}
solves the problem.
Welcome to 2017 these days will using vW and vH do the trick
html, body {
margin: 0; padding: 0;
width: 100%; height: 100%;
}
ul {
background: #CCC;
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
list-style-position: outside;
margin: 0; padding: 0;
}
li {
width: 100%;
display: table;
}
img {
width: 100%;
height: 410px;
}
.outer-wrapper {
position: absolute;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
top: 0;
margin: 0; padding: 0;
}
.inner-wrapper {
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: middle;
text-align: center;
width: 100vw; /* only change is here "%" to "vw" ! */
height: 100vh; /* only change is here "%" to "vh" ! */
}
<ul>
<li>
<img src="#">
<div class="outer-wrapper">
<div class="inner-wrapper">
<h1>My Title</h1>
<h5>Subtitle</h5>
</div>
</div>
</li>
</ul>
Your 100% means 100% of the viewport, you can fix that using the vw unit besides the % unit at the width. The problem is that 100vw is related to the viewport, besides % is related to parent tag. Do like that:
.table-cell-wrapper {
width: 100vw;
height: 100%;
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: middle;
text-align: center;
}
How about this? (jsFiddle link)
CSS
ul {
background: #CCC;
height: 1000%;
width: 100%;
list-style-position: outside;
margin: 0; padding: 0;
position: absolute;
}
li {
background-color: #EBEBEB;
border-bottom: 1px solid #CCCCCC;
border-right: 1px solid #CCCCCC;
display: table;
height: 180px;
overflow: hidden;
width: 200px;
}
.divone{
display: table-cell;
margin: 0 auto;
text-align: center;
vertical-align: middle;
width: 100%;
}
img {
width: 100%;
height: 410px;
}
.wrapper {
position: absolute;
}
Just add min-height:100% and min-width:100% and it will work. I had the same problem. You don't need a 3th wrapper