I am having an issue with the use of LazyLoad plugin from the original appelsiini.net.
When using the structure of
<img... />
<img... />
<img... />
That above works. But I am having another structure that is needed.
<div class="col-2-3">
<img lazyload-img ...>
<div>
<div class="col-1-3">
<p>Title+desc for image</p>
<div>
But for this usage - I am having no luck. I have looked at options, and tried to find answers. But did not.
Is the LazyLoad only for sequential img-tags? Or can this not be done with img-tags wrapped in divs?
Thank you.
Did you try this technique from the plugin page?
When Images Are Not Sequential
After scrolling page Lazy Load loops though unloaded images. In loop it checks if image has become visible. By default loop is stopped when first image below the fold (not visible) is found. This is based on following assumption. Order of images on page is same as order of images in HTML code. With some layouts assumption this might be wrong. You can control loading behaviour with failure_limit option.
$("img.lazy").lazyload({
failure_limit : 10
});
Setting failure_limit to 10 causes plugin to stop searching for images to load after finding 10 images below the fold. If you have a funky layout set this number to something high.
If you are using Lazy Load 1.8.0 you can specify the containers
$(".col-2-3 img").lazyload({ container: $(".col-2-3") });
It would be helpful to see the jQuery used to initialize the lazy load that works.
I tried different things, until I stopped understanding anything about everything.
But later on, when reverting - I did get it to work. But not by adding container or any other special options.
I guess it could have something to do with adding some clearfix to some containers somehow.
Thanks for your responses.
Here is the URL though for you curious people ;)
http://snickerietivarberg.se/wordpress/referenser/trapp-trappracken/?codekitCB=400070072.155490
Related
I need to create a website and I would like to increase the size of the buttons because it looks really really bad.
I'm not allowed to use any form of CSS or JavaScript for this project and the solutions I found so far all use CSS.
I've tried inserting the buttons into a table but that didn't do anything to help me and all the solutions I found on the internet either don't work or use CSS
You can use header elements like <h1>, <h2> etc. Semantically it may not be very 'clean' to use in this way (you are not creating headers as one would do in e.g. a publication), but I'm afraid there's not much else.
<button>Standard size</button><br />
<br />
<button><h1>Using h1</h1></button>
<button><h2>Using h2</h2></button>
<button><h3>Using h3</h3></button>
<button><h4>Using h4</h4></button>
I am just learning to code and have been looking everywhere for an answer on this one and for some reason cannot find anything.
I noticed that it seems to be common practice to put an image inside of a container or wrapper. For instance, rather just having:
<img src="url"/>
Everyone seems to be in agreement that it needs to be this way:
<div class="container">
<img=src"url"/>
</div>
What is the purpose of wrapping the img inside of a div in this way? It seems to have something to do with "responsive design", but I'm not 100% sure. Is it just so that we have something to size the image relative to, rather than using definite sizing like pixels on the image selector in css? The more I think about it as I write this, the more it seems to be the right answer, but I'm not sure if there's something else I'm missing on this one.
Any insight would be very much appreciated. Thank you.
unfortunately there is no "single" correct answer for this.
There can be many reasons as to why one would wrap any element in another element, it is not specific to <img /> tags :)
In your question I read something like this (converted to real world example):
I see that it is common practice to put a frame around a photo.
Where the "frame" would be the wrapper element, and the photo would be the <img />.
Looking at it this way might make it seem more clear. The photo is the most important part, technically speaking you don't need a frame to show the photo. If you have just a photo, you won't be able to hang it on your wall without damaging it by driving a nail through the top or applying some tape. If you have a frame though, you can make that photo take up any amount of available space within it, you can use the clip to hang it on a wall and if you put multiple photo's in the frame, you can move them all at once since they are in the same frame.
The reason most people put that image in a "container" is because they get some sort of advantage out of it over using an image alone, this could range from aspect-ratio locks to relative positioning. In some cases, a wrapper is required to achieve certain (notably more complex) animations as well.
Websites are built out of "logical" pieces that, together, form a website. The individual pieces are all "frames" that "flow" together to create any page layout you see on every website.
It is merely a structural way of thinking, if the purpose of that image was to be used as a background image for the entire page, a better alternative would be to use CSS background-image property on the <body> tag and not use the image at all. But if the image is meant to be part of a smaller part of your website, it should probably be contained as appropiate.
This answer is in no way a guide to go by, nor a ruleset or anything like that, they are just the thoughts of another developer. There are countless reasons for wrapping an element and this answer doesn't even cover 0.0000001% of those cases. I'm just saying -- there's no specific reason to do or don't here.
I am here to ask a couple of questions if I may.
I understand that the CSS is for styling, I have some method which works to a degree i.e text changing but this seems to be limited.
I have about 600 html pages that have some exact content on the pages.
I would have liked to be able to have a CSS or text doc which can be altered to change all html pages in one hit.
Though I am limited to html and css only, other options are not available to me.
I would one like to change blocks of text that is some volume, and images if possible, so I don't have to redo every page as it's very time consuming.
The other issue it needs to be cross browser compatible.
I know there are some great minds out there, I am willing to give any of them a go...
You should be able to use the css rule, "content: <desiredTextOrAttribute>"
https://www.w3schools.com/cssref/pr_gen_content.asp
Suppose you want to be able to set the title on all 600 pages to Company X:
HTML:
<div class="companyName"/>
CSS:
.companyName:after {
content: "Company X"
}
Here is a fiddle: https://jsfiddle.net/onm30rdn/1/
Of course, you won't be able to dynamically change this, and I think Javascript would be a way better solution in general. But this will work.
Assuming you can make your own custom stylesheets with css, you might get some love from pseudo-elements, such as ::before and ::after.
https://www.w3schools.com/css/css_pseudo_elements.asp
Basic idea is that if you can select an html element reliably, you can make a virtual element next to it for the browser to display. The code below would append "hello" before the existing text.
HTML
<body>
<p class="foo">World</p>
</body>
CSS
.foo::before {
content:"Hello ";
}
Result
Hello world
I've read various posts on this subject and think I understand the usual points of failure. I find that my two product thumbnail images, under the "This Click'n'Pick Set Consists Of The Following 2 Products" heading, are clickable, but do not take me to the named <div> element further down the page. Instead, they cause navigation to http://www.premierrange.co.uk/#bundle_product_anchor_448, for example. I see this both in Chrome (18.0.1025.33 beta) and Firefox (10.0.1) on Linux.
http://www.premierrange.co.uk/index.php?main_page=clicknpick&groups_id=2&chosen_0=243&chosen_1=448
So for example there's an anchor targeting '#bundle_product_anchor_243':
<a href="#bundle_product_anchor_243" title="Click here to jump to the 70cm Truly Curved Black Glass Curved Cooker Hood H77-7B">
<img src="http://www.premierrange.co.uk/thumbnailer.php?filename=images/H77-700.jpg&height=100" alt="70cm Truly Curved Black Glass Curved Cooker Hood H77-7B">
</a>
This targets the <div> further down the page:
<div class="productSeparator" id="bundle_product_anchor_243">
<h1>Product number 1 in this bundle of 2 products</h1>
</div>
I've also tried making the <h1> inside the target <div> be the target instead, in case the target must be an inline element rather than a div, but nothing seems to work.
The <div> containing the badly behaving <a> is completely closed by the time the <div> containing the target element appears in the document. I don't think there's a problem with the target element not being defined at the point in time the <a> is parsed by the browser.
Manually adding "#bundle_product_anchor_448" to the URL does work.
I am aware that the page fails HTML validation on a large number of points, due to a large number of factors that I'm not going to be able to address easily. I'd have thought this basic 'jump to a named element' functionality should work regardless. The page is completely functional other than this little navigation quirk.
Anyone got any clues?
Try removing <base href="http://www.premierrange.co.uk/"></base> from the page header.
The <base> tag specifies the base URL or target for all relative URLs (the ones that don't say http://www.example.com/...) on your page. Without it, your link should function as intended though you may have to fix other links to accommodate this change.
While using the <base> tag in your application, the best approach would be to just use absolute URL's before the hash, with the absolute URL pointing to the same page you're in.
So, assuming that you are on the 'http://example.com/products/curved-glass' page, instead of
<a href="#bundle_product_anchor_243">...
you would need to include the absolute current URL before the hash:
<a href="http://example.com/products/curved-glass#bundle_product_anchor_243">...
Finding out the current URL is a trivial task in most of the environments, and this method also avoids the removal of your <base> tag, action which might have negative consequences in other areas of your application.
If I put a simple iframe within a DIV any DIV's below it do not show up, the page stops there. If I just type some text with no iframe, it works fine—so it is the adding of the iframe that causes it.
The file loaded by the iframe is dummied right down and just displays the word TEST.
Before I start posting a lot of code and stuff, is this generally an issue—can an iframe be used within a DIV statement?
Thanks
Sounds like you're making a pretty common coding error: you can't short-tag an iframe. For instance:
<iframe src=" ... " />
is invalid. You must provide a full closing element:
<iframe src=" ... "></iframe>
It's silly, but it can cause your page to completely gum up. Also, check to make sure your quotes/apostrophes/carets are all proper, as those can cause similar problems.
Hope this helps!
There's no reason you can't wrap an Iframe in a DIV, but Iframes are notoriously difficult in layout and obviously we don't know what other styling rules might be affecting your box model.
You might try giving the containing DIV an 'overflow:scroll' or even just 'overflow:auto' in your CSS. This can help fix strange box model issues.