Not to start a big debate about tables vs css - here goes
I have a two column layout I want to achieve as you can see here:
http://jsfiddle.net/p5S5J/1/ (not to scale)
Here is my attempt at getting layout to work with DIVs
http://jsfiddle.net/xyt2r/1/
Basically, is there a way to have that second DIV automatically fill up the rest of the space in it's (fixed width) parent container without having to specify a width for it?
UPDATE
#thirtydot came up with this (I edited a bit): http://jsfiddle.net/thirtydot/xyt2r/5/
It seems that overflow: hidden on the second DIV keeps the border. I'll have to look at this closer since there seems to be some weird margin action in Chrome and I'm not convinced this isn't Voodoo yet. Anyone care to explain why/how this works?
So, I'm making a proper answer out of my comment. I've improved the CSS slightly.
See: http://jsfiddle.net/2WUgK/
I'm not convinced this isn't Voodoo yet
This will work in IE7+ and all modern browsers. The voodoo is thoroughly explained here :)
HTML:
<div id="my-container">
<div id="column-1" class="layout">Hi!</div>
<div id="column-2" class="layout">Hello</div>
</div>
CSS:
#my-container {
width: 200px;
border: 1px solid red;
padding: 6px 6px 6px 0;
}
#column-1 {
margin: 0 6px;
padding: 6px;
width: 60px;
float: left;
}
#column-2 {
padding: 6px;
overflow: hidden;
}
.layout {
border: 1px solid blue;
height: 120px;
}
I have created the layout you were looking for. Simple use of Float, and Clear (css elements) http://jsfiddle.net/louis002/ZWGfQ/10/
I prefer using tables since it seems to be more cross browser friendly.
But I hear you, so what i've done when i use div tags is "float" the left column left and float the right column right
<div style="float:left;">left column</div>
<div style="float:right:">right column</div>
I've had better luck with this than specifying widths since some browsers may not display it right or if i have dynamic data inside of it and it shifts, boom! your page is now all out of sorts.
Related
I want to know is there a way to centre text vertically without the use of a container element. something which is responsive.
EDIT
the only value I would know is the height of the h3 element, nothing more,
content will appear underneath some as etc
CSS
h3 {
height: 140px;
padding-top: 80px;
min-height: inherit;
border: 1px solid black;
text-align: center;
}
HTML
<h3>TEST</h3>
Here is an example of what i want to achieve
codepen test
Line-height is a beautiful thing, especially if its just text. And if you want to be responsive:
h3 {
background-color: transparent;
height: 40vh;
line-height: 40vh;
min-height: inherit;
border: 1px solid black;
text-align: center;
}
There is no easy way to do this. I have come up with a couple techniques over the years.
You have 80px in padding and a height of 140px for a combined height of 240px. If you know that the text will not exceed one line you can do it using line-height.
h3{
line-height:240px;
...
}
Another way is to use padding if you know the height of your text.
h3{
font-size: 20px;
line-height:20px;
padding:110px 0;/* (240-20)/2 */
...
}
note: I don't like the display: table-cell hack and have yet to need it. Why move away from a table based layout if you're just going to tell the browser to treat the element as a table?
Add to your code:
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: middle;
You will need to adjust your padding. That should work.
This article provides 6 different methods and their associated pros and cons; it explains it far better than I could here. The solutions provided as answers here are good, but the article really covers niche cases and allows you to choose the best method to fit your needs.
http://www.vanseodesign.com/css/vertical-centering/
You're going to have a containing element, regardless. It's just that the body might be the container.
You could do this:
body {
height:100%;
display: table;
margin: 0px;
padding: 0px;
}
h3 {
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: middle;
}
OR...
body {
height:100%;
margin: 0px;
padding: 0px;
}
h3 {
position: relative;
top: 50%;
}
edit - removed width specific styles as it has nothing to do with the solution. Thanks to Jason for the margin/padding set to 0px to remove ugly scrollbars. Jason also noted that this solution did not work for Chrome unless the "body" element in the styles was changed to "html, body", but I was not able to replicate this problem using Chrome version 35.0... For good measure I also opened a test page in Safari and Firefox and they also worked as expected.
edit^2 - Figured out the problem Jason saw. If you use the html5 doctype, then, yes, you will have to include the html element with the body style. This also makes the scrollbar reappear in the relative position solution. So that's fun. I will leave this up for the purpose of saving frustration in the future, but I would check out the link provided in Jason's solution.
http://phrogz.net/CSS/vertical-align/
How can I vertically center text in a dynamically height div?
I stumbled upon a difference in layout rendering between Safari and Chrome/Firefox and I don't know which one is "right".
You can check the jsfiddle here
On Firefox/Chrome the layout is as expected, the yellow div is right after the red ones. But on Safari, the yellow div is positioned under the red ones.
After investigating what I did wrong I found out the bug comes from the CSS class E whose property margin-right (value: -11px) is bigger than the width property (value: 10px) for my div.
I think I understand why Safari renders it this way. The width of div of class B is computed as being the sum of the widths of its children as they have the property float: left;.
Here it is widthB = widthB2*2 + widthE + marginRightE + widthC or marginRightE < -widthE so widthB is not large enough to contain each div next to each other.
So my questions are:
Am I right in my understanding of what Safari does?
Why do Chrome and Firefox render differently? Are they just not decreasing the width of the parent div based on a negative margin-right?
Would the proper correction to always have a margin-right lesser or equal to the width of a div in this case?
Thank you!
HTML:
<div class="A">
<div class="C">
<div class="B">
<div class="B2"></div>
<div class="B2"></div>
<div class="E"></div>
<div class="C">
<div class="D"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
CSS:
.A {
background-color: blue;
height: 200px;
}
.B {
height:100px;
}
.B2 {
background-color: red;
height: 100px;
width: 100px;
float: left;
}
.C {
float: left;
}
.D {
height: 40px;
width: 40px;
float:left;
background-color: yellow;
}
.E {
height: 50px;
width: 10px;
position: relative;
left: -10px;
margin-right: -11px;
background-color: black;
float: left;
}
I'm not sure what you expect to happen with the CSS in the JS fiddle. You are delving into undefined behaviour. I say this because:
'C' is floated but does not have a defined width. This leads to issues in various browsers depending on the complexity of the layout.
None of the floated elements are ever cleared. When floating it is imperative that a clearfix of some description is used, whether it is clear:both, etc.
If you tweak the mark-up and add a clear-fix, you see that the content is always 239px. See http://jsfiddle.net/eaFn9/
However, it seems like the relatively positioned item 'E' and margin is having a negative impact on the width calculation, as Chrome's web inspector seems to always report oddly for the negative margin on this element.
If you play around with this in web inspector you can see it's almost as if the negative margin is the cause of the drop. I think it may be due to a container that does not have a width, and isn't position relative in itself.
How to fix?
Personally, I would want to re-write your layout to include fixed widths on all floats, reduce nesting of floats and clear where possible. It seems overly complex but without a real world use case it's hard to rewrite.
However, It seemed to me that you can wrap 'B2' + 'E' elements in a wrapper that is floated and relatively positioned, then use absolute positioning on 'E' to give the same affect and remove the negative margin.
This is the JSFiddle I came up with: http://jsfiddle.net/jV3Ub/
Sorry, this is not really an answer but it's too long to make it a comment...
Anyway, it took me a minute to figure this out.
I used Firefox 19 on Mac OS X 10.8.2, Chrome 24.0 (Mac) and Safari 6.0.2 (Mac as well). Using the web inspector tools, I realized the divs are not computed the same way indeed. I suck at calculations, but I took the time to sit down and look at this thoroughly, and I do understand Safari's calculations the same way you do.
In Safari, it seems that div B isn't wide enough to contain the yellow div (C) so it seems to reject it to the bottom. For the record, in my tests, I see the yellow div to the right of the red div in FF and Chrome, while Safari shows it right underneath the red, and to the upper left. I am not sure this will help, but I can only recommend you to use the web inspector tools now integrated to all modern browsers to debug this.
I'm not sure about why this happens, all I know is that by only changing the width of E by 1px, like so:
.E {
height: 50px;
width: 11px; /* added 1px to this property */
position: relative;
left: -10px;
margin-right: -11px;
background-color: black;
float: left;
}
it displays correctly in Safari.
Make the following changes to classes .D and .E:
.D {
float:left;
height: 40px;
width: 40px;
background-color: yellow;
margin-left: -11px;
}
.E{
height: 50px;
width: 10px;
position: relative;
left: -10px;
background-color: black;
float: left;
}
DEMO: http://jsfiddle.net/uryJJ/22/
I hope this helps!
SECOND EDIT:
I think we should link these two questions: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4989930/css-negative-margin and why use negative margins? to this one.
Also See the W3C spec on margin: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/box.html#margin-properties.
Section 8.3.1 Might actually explain what is going on with your sample. A collapsing margin issue not rendering correctly in Safari.
ORIGINAL POSTING:
So my questions are:
1) Am I right in my understanding of what Safari does. Why do Chrome and Firefox render differently? Sounds like that might be it, but, really, who cares? You are not getting the results you want. You should change your code unless you don't care about Safari users.
2) Are they just not decreasing the width of the parent div based on a negative margin-right?
Probably, but again, not really important.
3) Would the proper correction to always have a margin-right lesser or equal to the width of a div in this case? I would say yes. To fix the issue and get the results you want I would move the div with class E inside the right most div with class B2. Then float E to the right and remove the position, left and margin-right attributes.
.E {
height: 50px;
width: 10px;
background-color: black;
float: right;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/uryJJ/32/
FIRST EDIT
.D {
height: 40px;
width: 40px;
float:left;
background-color: yellow;
position:relative;
left: -10px;
}
.E {
height: 50px;
width: 10px;
position: relative;
left: -10px;
background-color: black;
float: left;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/uryJJ/33/
Sorry, I might be beating this to death but this fixes it:
.E {
height: 50px;
width: 10px;
margin-left: -10px;
background-color: black;
float: left;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/uryJJ/35/
I was not a fan of negative margin values until just now.
Situation: I have a container with two direct children, we will call them left and right.
left should never be allowed to extend past the height of right, however right should be allowed to extend past the height of left.
I can't figure out how to do this with CSS (hopefully while maintaining the simplicity of my markup)
example html
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="left">
left
</div>
<div class="right">
right
</div>
</div>
example css
.wrapper {
display: inline-block;
margin: 10px 0;
}
.left {
float: left;
width: 60px;
background-color: #999;
}
.right {
float: left;
width: 540px;
border: 4px solid #666;
padding: 8px;
}
or see what I mean here
It's kind of an common problem. The thing is, you need either a CSS/background image trick or use javascript. One common used is Faux Columns.
Yes, you need to rely on JavaScript for this kind of problem, you could just always set the min-height of the left column according to the height of the right column, or something similar to that!
Using jQuery, this might help you getting started! http://www.cssnewbie.com/equal-height-columns-with-jquery/
I have been tasked with modifying the layout of a site so that it meets the criteria of the client's corporate style guide.
The guide is requiring that I ensure certain elements are spaced [X]px from other elements, and that elements of this type are lined up with elements of that type.
So as I'm doing this, I can see that the existing spacings are defined in some cases using padding, and in other cases using margin.
Is there a preferred way of doing this? When should I use one in favour of the other?
In layman terms.
If you have two div's next to one another, the space between the two is referred to as the margin.
If you have text inside a div, the space between the edge of the div(top,right,bottom,left) and text is referred to as padding.
That really depends somehow. Margin and Padding are two different things. However in some cases you will not notice a difference.
A figure which shows you the difference:
Source: http://www.edition-w3c.de/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-19980512/bilder/boxdim.gif
So for example: If you want to define the space between the border and your content you will only achieve this with padding(while having a visible border).
The difference is best explained visually.
Try this out:
<html>
<head>
<style>
body { background-color: #E342FF; margin: 0; padding: 0; }
#mydiv { border: 2px solid #000000; width: 50%; height: 20%; margin: 50px 0 0 50px; }
#mydiv2 { border: 2px solid #000000; width: 50%; height: 20%; padding: 50px 0 0 50px; }
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div id="mydiv">
</div>
<div id="mydiv2">
</div>
</body>
</html>
You should see that the margin is simply moving the div, and the padding is actually making it larger.
I have some pretty basic HTML/CSS that isn't working as I expect. Basically I have my body setup to be 400px wide. I then have two divs inside of the body with explicit widths of 300px and 100px. Additionally, both of these divs are set to display: inline-block. For some reason, the 100px div breaks out of the body's content area and appears below it. I don't know why this is happening. If I set the width from 100px to 96px, it works. However, if I set it to 97px, 98px, 99px, or back to 100px, it doesn't work. I find this behavior very odd. Can someone explain what is going wrong?
Note that I am testing this on Chrome (Beta Channel). Code is below.
The CSS:
body {
margin: 4px;
width: 400px;
height: 250px;
border: 1px solid black;
}
.list-container {
display: inline-block;
width: 300px;
height: 100%;
background-color: red;
}
.button-container {
display: inline-block;
width: 100px;
height: 100%;
background-color: blue;
}
The HTML:
<body>
<div class="list-container">
</div>
<div class="button-container">
</div>
</body>
It's because of the way white-space collapses in html.
If you remove the line-breaks from between the two div elements, everything's fine:
<div class="list-container">
</div><div class="button-container">
</div>
JS Fiddle demo.
You could, also, just comment-out the between divs:
<div class="list-container">
</div><!--
--><div class="button-container">
</div>
JS Fiddle demo.
Or even set the font-size to zero for the body element (but you'll have to redefine it for the child elements, obviously:
body {
margin: 4px;
width: 400px;
height: 250px;
border: 1px solid black;
padding: 0;
font-size: 0;
}
JS Fiddle demo.
Another possibility with odd inline-block behaviour in Chrome is if you have text-render: optimizeLegibility set. I was struggling with inexplicable line-breaks in inline block elements in Chrome, and found that removing text-render: optimizeLegibility fixed the problem.
I've had at least one other hard-to-figure-out problem (inexplicable non-rendering of web fonts) that turned out to be caused by optimizeLegibility in the past, so from now on that's going to be a prime suspect when things behave strangely in Chrome.
(nb. Even if you don't think you're using it, if you're using a framework like Twitter Bootstrap you may be using it unwittingly)
It's the margin in your body:
margin: 4px;
Because the margin counts as part of the total width. 300px for the first one + 100px for the second div + 8px (4 on either side) for the margin = 408px. That forces the second div down to the next line.
I'm actually kind of surprised that it works at 96. It acts like it's only accounting for the margin on one side. I'd expect it to only work at 92 or below. Either way account for the margin size in the width of your body or set the margin to 0 and that should fix the problem.