Absolute position and Overflow:hidden - html

<div id="parent" style="overflow:hidden; position:relative;">
<div id="child" style="position:absolute;">
</div>
</div>
I need to show child element which is bigger than it's parent element, but without removing overflow:hidden; is this possible?
parent element has position:relative;
child element gets stripped as soon as it's out of it's parents borders.
(elements have additional css defined I just put style attributes for clearness)

It's completely impossible to do what you want with both overflow: hidden and position: relative on the parent div.. instead you can introduce an extra child div and move overflow: hidden to that.
See: http://jsfiddle.net/thirtydot/TFTnU/
HTML:
<div id="parent">
<div id="hideOverflow">
<div style="width:1000px;background:#ccc">sdfsd</div>
</div>
<div id="child">overflow "visible"</div>
</div>
CSS:
#parent {
position:relative;
background:red;
width:100px;
height:100px
}
#child {
position:absolute;
background:#f0f;
width:300px;
bottom: 0;
left: 0
}
#hideOverflow {
overflow: hidden
}
#parent {
position: relative;
background: red;
width: 100px;
height: 100px
}
#child {
position: absolute;
background: #f0f;
width: 300px;
bottom: 0;
left: 0
}
#hideOverflow {
overflow: hidden
}
<div id="parent">
<div id="hideOverflow">
<div style="width:1000px;background:#ccc">sdfsd</div>
</div>
<div id="child">overflow "visible"</div>
</div>

The code below works like a charm.
<div id="grandparent" style="position:relative;">
<div id="parent" style="overflow:hidden;">
<div id="child" style="position:absolute;">
</div>
</div>
</div>

The Problem has a Name: "offsetParent". As soon as an element gets the position abolute|relative or has its position/size altered by a transformation, it becomes the offsetParent of its children. The original offsetParent for all elements (and therefore the area in which overflowing content will be shown or relative to which absolute positions are given) is the viewport of the browser or the iFrame. But after an absolute or relative position had been applied to an element, ist bounding box is the new origin for positioning and clipping of all of ist children.
In a Project, I had a 'popup' window containing a pulldown menu. The pulldown could easily extend over the limits of the window. But as soon as the window was moved (by using a transformation or relative positioning), the pulldown appeared at a wrong place (having the top-left Position of the window as additional Offset) and was clipped at the window's borders. The quick hack I used was to append the pulldown as child of Body (instead fo the window) and position it absolute, using the coordinates of the button that opens the menu (from the clientBoundingBox of the button) and the offset from the button's offsetParent) as absolute position of the pulldown. Then the Body again was the limiting area. This is, however, a bit tricky if it comes to multiple Levels of z-axis ordering (as the pulldown's z-axis is relative to Body, which might be different from the one the window has). But since the window has to be visible (therefore on top) to open the menu, this was negligible.
Of course, this solution requires the use of JavaScript and cannot be done by simple CSS.
You can't eat the cake and keep it. If you take something out of the layout context, it becomes ist own, indepenent (and limited) layout 'frame'

I usually use overflow:hidden as clearfix. In this case, I give up and just add an additional div.
<div id="parent" style="position:relative;">
<!-- floating divs here -->
<div id="child" style="position:absolute;"></div>
<div style="clear:both"></div>
</div>

Use css...
* {margin: 0; padding: 0;}
#parent {width: auto; overflow: hidden;}
#child {position: absolute; width: auto;}
With width auto it will always append to the smallest possible size; and with the reset it will help maintain natural flow.
But if the child is bigger in any way than the parent, then it will not be possible. But with this CSS I think you will achieve what you want to the maximum of what is possible.

I did this in a very simple way
<div class="rootparent">
<div class="parent">
<div class="child"></div>
</div>
</div>
.rootparent {
position:relative;
border:1px solid #ccc;
width:150px;
height:150px;
}
.parent {
overflow:hidden;
}
.child {
position: absolute;
top: -10px;
right: -15px;
width: 30px;
height: 30px;
border: 1px solid red;
}
Here is jsfiddle link

thirtydot's solution is actually a good idea.
Here's a clearer example: http://jsfiddle.net/y9dtL68d/
HTML
<div id="grandparent">
<div id="parent">
<p>this has a lot of content which ...</p>
<p>this has a lot of content which ...</p>
<p>this has a lot of content which ...</p>
<p>this has a lot of content which ...</p>
<p>this has a lot of content which ...</p>
<p>this has a lot of content which ...</p>
<p>this has a lot of content which ...</p>
</div>
<div id="child">
dudes
</div>
</div>
CSS
#grandparent {
position: relative;
width: 150px;
height: 150px;
margin: 20px;
background: #d0d0d0;
}
#parent {
width: 150px;
height: 150px;
overflow:hidden;
}
#child {
position: absolute;
background: red;
color: white;
left: 100%;
top: 0;
}

I believe, every front-end developer encountered this situation, at least once. Let's say you need to absolute position something… And then you try to move it in some direction, and boom it disappears… You forgot the parent was set to overflow:hidden and now your element is lost in the hidden infinite vacuum.There is a css trick to do this.Please find the below demo example for it...
<br><br><br>
<div class="grand-parent">
<div class="parent">P
<div class="child">child</div>
</div>
</div>
css code:
.grand-parent {
width:50px;
height:50px;
position:relative;
background-color: grey;
}
.parent {
width:10px;
height:30px;
overflow:hidden;
background-color: blue;
}
.child {
position:absolute;
width:50px;
height:20px;
background-color: red;
top:-10px;
left:5px;
}

Related

Place div to bottom of parent div [duplicate]

Given the following HTML:
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
I would like #copyright to stick to the bottom of #container. Can I achieve this without using absolute positioning?
Likely not.
Assign position:relative to #container, and then position:absolute; bottom:0; to #copyright.
#container {
position: relative;
}
#copyright {
position: absolute;
bottom: 0;
}
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
Actually, the accepted answer by #User will only work if the window is tall and the content is short. But if the content is tall and the window is short, it will put the copyright info over the page content, and then scrolling down to see the content will leave you with a floating copyright notice. That makes this solution useless for most pages (like this page, actually).
The most common way of doing this is the "CSS sticky footer" approach demonstrated, or a slightly slimmer variation. This approach works great -- IF you have a fixed height footer.
If you need a variable height footer that will appear at the bottom of the window if the content is too short, and at the bottom of the content if the window is too short, what do you do?
Swallow your pride and use a table.
For example:
* {
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
}
html, body {
height: 100%;
}
#container {
height: 100%;
border-collapse: collapse;
}
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<body>
<table id="container">
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<div id="main">Lorem ipsum, etc.</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom">
<div id="footer">Copyright some evil company...</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>
Try it out. This will work for any window size, for any amount of content, for any size footer, on every browser... even IE6.
If you're cringing at the thought of using a table for layout, take a second to ask yourself why. CSS was supposed to make our lives easier -- and it has, overall -- but the fact is that even after all these years, it's still a broken, counter-intuitive mess. It can't solve every problem. It's incomplete.
Tables aren't cool, but at least for now, they are sometimes the best way to solve a design problem.
The flexbox approach!
In supported browsers, you can use the following:
Example Here
.parent {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.child {
margin-top: auto;
}
.parent {
height: 100px;
border: 5px solid #000;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.child {
height: 40px;
width: 100%;
background: #f00;
margin-top: auto;
}
<div class="parent">
<div class="child">Align to the bottom</div>
</div>
The solution above is probably more flexible, however, here is an alternative solution:
Example Here
.parent {
display: flex;
}
.child {
align-self: flex-end;
}
.parent {
height: 100px;
border: 5px solid #000;
display: flex;
}
.child {
height: 40px;
width: 100%;
background: #f00;
align-self: flex-end;
}
<div class="parent">
<div class="child">Align to the bottom</div>
</div>
As a side note, you may want to add vendor prefixes for additional support.
Yes you can do this without absolute positioning and without using tables (which screw with markup and such).
DEMO
This is tested to work on IE>7, chrome, FF & is a really easy thing to add to your existing layout.
<div id="container">
Some content you don't want affected by the "bottom floating" div
<div>supports not just text</div>
<div class="foot">
Some other content you want kept to the bottom
<div>this is in a div</div>
</div>
</div>
#container {
height:100%;
border-collapse:collapse;
display : table;
}
.foot {
display : table-row;
vertical-align : bottom;
height : 1px;
}
It effectively does what float:bottom would, even accounting for the issue pointed out in #Rick Reilly's answer!
Pure CSS, without absolute positioning, without fixing any height, cross-browser (IE9+)
check out that Working Fiddle
Because normal flow is 'top-to-bottom' we can't simply ask the #copyright div to stick to the bottom of his parent without absolutely positioning of some sort, But if we wanted the #copyright div to stick to the top of his parent, it will be very simple - because this is the normal flow way.
So we will use this in our advantage.
we will change the order of the divs in the HTML, now the #copyright div is at the top, and the content follow it right away.
we also make the content div stretch all the way (using pseudo elements and clearing techniques)
now it's just a matter of inverting that order back in the view. that can be easily done with CSS transform.
We rotate the container by 180deg, and now: up-is-down. (and we inverse back the content to look normal again)
If we want to have a scroolbar within the content area, we need to apply a little bit more of CSS magic. as can be showed Here [in that example, the content is below a header - but its the same idea]
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
html,
body,
#Container {
height: 100%;
color: white;
}
#Container:before {
content: '';
height: 100%;
float: left;
}
#Copyright {
background-color: green;
}
#Stretch {
background-color: blue;
}
#Stretch:after {
content: '';
display: block;
clear: both;
}
#Container,
#Container>div {
-moz-transform: rotateX(180deg);
-ms-transform: rotateX(180deg);
-o-transform: rotate(180deg);
-webkit-transform: rotateX(180deg);
transform: rotateX(180deg);
}
<div id="Container">
<div id="Copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
<div id="Stretch">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div>Element 1</div>
<div>Element 2</div>
</div>
</div>
CSS Grid
Since the usage of CSS Grid is increasing, I would like to suggest align-self to the element that is inside a grid container.
align-self can contain any of the values: end, self-end, flex-end for the following example.
#parent {
display: grid;
}
#child1 {
align-self: end;
}
/* Extra Styling for Snippet */
#parent {
height: 150px;
background: #5548B0;
color: #fff;
padding: 10px;
font-family: sans-serif;
}
#child1 {
height: 50px;
width: 50px;
background: #6A67CE;
text-align: center;
vertical-align: middle;
line-height: 50px;
}
<div id="parent">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="child1">
1
</div>
</div>
Create another container div for the elements above #copyright. Just above copyright add a new div:
<div style="clear:both;"></div>
It will force the footer to be under everything else, just like in the case of using relative positioning (bottom:0px;).
Try this;
<div id="container">
<div style="height: 100%; border:1px solid #ff0000;">
<!-- Other elements here -->
</div>
</div>
<div id="copyright" style="position:relative;border:1px solid #00ff00;top:-25px">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
While none of the answers provided here seemed to apply or work in my particular case, I came across this article which provides this neat solution :
#container {
display: table;
}
#copyright {
display: table-footer-group;
}
I find it very useful for applying responsive design for mobile display without having to reorder all the html code of a website, setting body itself as a table.
Note that only the first table-footer-group or table-header-group will be rendered as such : if there are more than one, the others will be rendered as table-row-group.
You can indeed align the box to the bottom without using position:absolute if you know the height of the #container using the text alignment feature of inline-block elements.
Here you can see it in action.
This is the code:
#container {
/* So the #container most have a fixed height */
height: 300px;
line-height: 300px;
background:Red;
}
#container > * {
/* Restore Line height to Normal */
line-height: 1.2em;
}
#copyright {
display:inline-block;
vertical-align:bottom;
width:100%; /* Let it be a block */
background:green;
}
Using the translateY and top property
Just set element child to position: relative and than move it top: 100% (that's the 100% height of the parent) and stick to bottom of parent by transform: translateY(-100%) (that's -100% of the height of the child).
BenefitS
you do not take the element from the page flow
it is dynamic
But still just workaround :(
.copyright{
position: relative;
top: 100%;
transform: translateY(-100%);
}
Don't forget prefixes for the older browser.
CodePen link here.
html, body {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.overlay {
min-height: 100%;
position: relative;
}
.container {
width: 900px;
position: relative;
padding-bottom: 50px;
}
.height {
width: 900px;
height: 50px;
}
.footer {
width: 900px;
height: 50px;
position: absolute;
bottom: 0;
}
<div class="overlay">
<div class="container">
<div class="height">
content
</div>
</div>
<div class="footer">
footer
</div>
</div>
If you want it to "stick" to the bottom, regardless of the height of container, then absolute positioning is the way to go. Of course, if the copyright element is the last in the container it'll always be at the bottom anyway.
Can you expand on your question? Explain exactly what you're trying to do (and why you don't want to use absolute positioning)?
If you do not know the height of child block:
#parent {
background:green;
width:200px;
height:200px;
display:table-cell;
vertical-align:bottom;
}
.child {
background:red;
vertical-align:bottom;
}
<div id="parent">
<div class="child">child
</div>
</div>
http://jsbin.com/ULUXIFon/3/edit
If you know the height of the child block add the child block then add padding-top/margin-top:
#parent {
background:green;
width:200px;
height:130px;
padding-top:70px;
}
.child {
background:red;
vertical-align:
bottom;
height:130px;
}
<div id="parent">
<div class="child">child
</div>
</div>
You can use grid by assigning the available space to the content at the top:
#container {
display: grid;
grid-template-rows: 1fr auto;
height: 10rem; /* or 100% or anything */
}
<div id="container">
This is random content.
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
Also, if there's stipulations with using position:absolute; or position:relative;, you can always try padding parent div or putting a margin-top:x;. Not a very good method in most cases, but it may come in handy in some cases.
Solution for this specific scenario:
Place inner at the bottom of parent . The height of the parent is set by the height of its "tallest" sibling
The set up:
I have a row with multiple <div class="container">
These <div class="container"> are next to each other inside another <div class="supercontainer">
Each <div class="container"> has 3 inner divs on top of each other: <div class="title">, <div class="content">, <div class="footer">
The desired result:
All <div class="container"> have the same height. The height is not defined in px, it will be the height of the "tallest" among them.
<div class="title"> should be at the top of <div class="container">
<div class="content"> should be placed below <div class="title">
<div class="footer"> should be placed at the bottom of <div class="container"> without overlapping with the previous content
This is the current state: https://codepen.io/xavier-atero/pen/ExvWQww
.supercontainer {
border: solid 1px black;
display: flex;
}
.container, .other-container {
position: relative;
border: solid 1px red;
width: 200px;
margin: 10px;
}
.title {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px blue;
}
.content {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px cyan;
}
.footer {
margin: 10px;
background: lime;
}
<body>
<div class="supercontainer">
<div class="container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
<div class="other-container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top.
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title. This one is longer than the first one to stretch the parent div. Since it is longer, the footers of the two containers are not alinged.
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
__________ Solution with FLEXBOX __________
This is the outcome: https://codepen.io/xavier-atero/pen/MWvpBMz
.supercontainer {
border: solid 1px black;
display: flex;
}
.container, .other-container {
position: relative;
border: solid 1px red;
width: 200px;
margin: 10px;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.title {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px blue;
}
.content {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px cyan;
}
.footer {
margin: 10px;
background: lime;
margin-top: auto;
border: solid 1px fuchsia;
}
<body>
<div class="supercontainer">
<div class="container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
<div class="other-container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top.
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title. This one is longer than the first one to stretch the parent div. Since it is longer, the footers of the two containers are not alinged.
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
__________ Solution with TABLE-ROW __________
This is the outcome: https://codepen.io/xavier-atero/pen/rNzyKJm
.supercontainer {
border: solid 1px black;
display: flex;
}
.container, .other-container {
position: relative;
border: solid 1px red;
width: 200px;
margin: 10px;
border-collapse:collapse;
display : table;
}
.title {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px blue;
}
.content {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px cyan;
}
.footer {
margin: 10px;
background: lime;
border: solid 1px fuchsia;
display: table-row;
vertical-align: bottom;
height: 1px;
}
<body>
<div class="supercontainer">
<div class="container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
<div class="other-container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top.
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title. This one is longer than the first one to stretch the parent div. Since it is longer, the footers of the two containers are not alinged.
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
#container{width:100%; float:left; position:relative;}
#copyright{position:absolute; bottom:0px; left:0px; background:#F00; width:100%;}
#container{background:gray; height:100px;}
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
Don't wanna use "position:absolute" for sticky footer at bottom. Then you can do this way:
html,
body {
height: 100%;
margin: 0;
}
.wrapper {
min-height: 100%;
/* Equal to height of footer */
/* But also accounting for potential margin-bottom of last child */
margin-bottom: -50px;
}
.footer{
background: #000;
text-align: center;
color: #fff;
}
.footer,
.push {
height: 50px;
}
<html>
<body>
<!--HTML Code-->
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="content">content</div>
<div class="push"></div>
</div>
<footer class="footer">test</footer>
</body>
</html>
Here is an approach targeted at making an element with a known height and width (at least approximately) float to the right and stay at the bottom, while behaving as an inline element to the other elements. It is focused at the bottom-right because you can place it easily in any other corner through other methods.
I needed to make a navigation bar which would have the actual links at the bottom right, and random sibling elements, while ensuring that the bar itself stretched properly, without disrupting the layout. I used a "shadow" element to occupy the navigation bar's links' space and added it at the end of the container's child nodes.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
<span id="copyright-s">filler</span>
</div>
<style>
#copyright {
display:inline-block;
position:absolute;
bottom:0;
right:0;
}
#copyright-s {
float:right;
visibility:hidden;
width:20em; /* ~ #copyright.style.width */
height:3em; /* ~ #copyright.style.height */
}
</style>
Maybe this helps someone: You can always place the div outside the other div and then push it upwards using negative margin:
<div id="container" style="background-color: #ccc; padding-bottom: 30px;">
Hello!
</div>
<div id="copyright" style="margin-top: -20px;">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
Just because this hasn't been mentioned at all, what usually works well in situations like yours:
Placing the copyright-div after the container-div
You would only have to format the copyright-div in a similar way to the other container (same overall width, centering, etc.), and all is fine.
CSS:
#container, #copyright {
width: 1000px;
margin:0 auto;
}
HTML:
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
</div>
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
The only time this might not be ideal is when your container-div is declared with height:100%, and the user would need to scroll down to see the copyright. But even still you could work around (e.g. margin-top:-20px - when the height of your copyright element is 20px).
No absolute positioning
No table layout
No crazy css, that looks different in every other browser (well IE at least, you know)
Simple and clear formatting
Aside: I know the OP asked for a solution that "... sticks to the bottom of the 'container' div ...", and not something under it, but come on, people are looking for good solutions here, and this is one!
There is nothing called float:bottom in CSS. The best way is using positioning in such cases:
position:absolute;
bottom:0;
For those only have one child in the container, you can use the table-cell and vertical-align approach which worked reliably for positioning a single div at the bottom of its parent.
Note that using table-footer-group as other answers mentioned will break the height calculation of parent table.
#container {
display: table;
width: 100%;
height: 200px;
}
#item {
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: bottom;
}
<div id="container">
<div id="item">Single bottom item</div>
</div>
According: w3schools.com
An element with position: absolute; is positioned relative to the
nearest positioned ancestor (instead of positioned relative to the
viewport, like fixed).
So you need to position the parent element with something either relative or absolute, etc and position the desired element to absolute and latter set bottom to 0.

Place inner <div> at the bottom of parent <div>. The height of the parent <div> is set by the height of its "tallest" sibling <div> [duplicate]

Given the following HTML:
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
I would like #copyright to stick to the bottom of #container. Can I achieve this without using absolute positioning?
Likely not.
Assign position:relative to #container, and then position:absolute; bottom:0; to #copyright.
#container {
position: relative;
}
#copyright {
position: absolute;
bottom: 0;
}
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
Actually, the accepted answer by #User will only work if the window is tall and the content is short. But if the content is tall and the window is short, it will put the copyright info over the page content, and then scrolling down to see the content will leave you with a floating copyright notice. That makes this solution useless for most pages (like this page, actually).
The most common way of doing this is the "CSS sticky footer" approach demonstrated, or a slightly slimmer variation. This approach works great -- IF you have a fixed height footer.
If you need a variable height footer that will appear at the bottom of the window if the content is too short, and at the bottom of the content if the window is too short, what do you do?
Swallow your pride and use a table.
For example:
* {
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
}
html, body {
height: 100%;
}
#container {
height: 100%;
border-collapse: collapse;
}
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<body>
<table id="container">
<tr>
<td valign="top">
<div id="main">Lorem ipsum, etc.</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom">
<div id="footer">Copyright some evil company...</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>
Try it out. This will work for any window size, for any amount of content, for any size footer, on every browser... even IE6.
If you're cringing at the thought of using a table for layout, take a second to ask yourself why. CSS was supposed to make our lives easier -- and it has, overall -- but the fact is that even after all these years, it's still a broken, counter-intuitive mess. It can't solve every problem. It's incomplete.
Tables aren't cool, but at least for now, they are sometimes the best way to solve a design problem.
The flexbox approach!
In supported browsers, you can use the following:
Example Here
.parent {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.child {
margin-top: auto;
}
.parent {
height: 100px;
border: 5px solid #000;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.child {
height: 40px;
width: 100%;
background: #f00;
margin-top: auto;
}
<div class="parent">
<div class="child">Align to the bottom</div>
</div>
The solution above is probably more flexible, however, here is an alternative solution:
Example Here
.parent {
display: flex;
}
.child {
align-self: flex-end;
}
.parent {
height: 100px;
border: 5px solid #000;
display: flex;
}
.child {
height: 40px;
width: 100%;
background: #f00;
align-self: flex-end;
}
<div class="parent">
<div class="child">Align to the bottom</div>
</div>
As a side note, you may want to add vendor prefixes for additional support.
Yes you can do this without absolute positioning and without using tables (which screw with markup and such).
DEMO
This is tested to work on IE>7, chrome, FF & is a really easy thing to add to your existing layout.
<div id="container">
Some content you don't want affected by the "bottom floating" div
<div>supports not just text</div>
<div class="foot">
Some other content you want kept to the bottom
<div>this is in a div</div>
</div>
</div>
#container {
height:100%;
border-collapse:collapse;
display : table;
}
.foot {
display : table-row;
vertical-align : bottom;
height : 1px;
}
It effectively does what float:bottom would, even accounting for the issue pointed out in #Rick Reilly's answer!
Pure CSS, without absolute positioning, without fixing any height, cross-browser (IE9+)
check out that Working Fiddle
Because normal flow is 'top-to-bottom' we can't simply ask the #copyright div to stick to the bottom of his parent without absolutely positioning of some sort, But if we wanted the #copyright div to stick to the top of his parent, it will be very simple - because this is the normal flow way.
So we will use this in our advantage.
we will change the order of the divs in the HTML, now the #copyright div is at the top, and the content follow it right away.
we also make the content div stretch all the way (using pseudo elements and clearing techniques)
now it's just a matter of inverting that order back in the view. that can be easily done with CSS transform.
We rotate the container by 180deg, and now: up-is-down. (and we inverse back the content to look normal again)
If we want to have a scroolbar within the content area, we need to apply a little bit more of CSS magic. as can be showed Here [in that example, the content is below a header - but its the same idea]
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
html,
body,
#Container {
height: 100%;
color: white;
}
#Container:before {
content: '';
height: 100%;
float: left;
}
#Copyright {
background-color: green;
}
#Stretch {
background-color: blue;
}
#Stretch:after {
content: '';
display: block;
clear: both;
}
#Container,
#Container>div {
-moz-transform: rotateX(180deg);
-ms-transform: rotateX(180deg);
-o-transform: rotate(180deg);
-webkit-transform: rotateX(180deg);
transform: rotateX(180deg);
}
<div id="Container">
<div id="Copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
<div id="Stretch">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div>Element 1</div>
<div>Element 2</div>
</div>
</div>
CSS Grid
Since the usage of CSS Grid is increasing, I would like to suggest align-self to the element that is inside a grid container.
align-self can contain any of the values: end, self-end, flex-end for the following example.
#parent {
display: grid;
}
#child1 {
align-self: end;
}
/* Extra Styling for Snippet */
#parent {
height: 150px;
background: #5548B0;
color: #fff;
padding: 10px;
font-family: sans-serif;
}
#child1 {
height: 50px;
width: 50px;
background: #6A67CE;
text-align: center;
vertical-align: middle;
line-height: 50px;
}
<div id="parent">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="child1">
1
</div>
</div>
Create another container div for the elements above #copyright. Just above copyright add a new div:
<div style="clear:both;"></div>
It will force the footer to be under everything else, just like in the case of using relative positioning (bottom:0px;).
Try this;
<div id="container">
<div style="height: 100%; border:1px solid #ff0000;">
<!-- Other elements here -->
</div>
</div>
<div id="copyright" style="position:relative;border:1px solid #00ff00;top:-25px">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
While none of the answers provided here seemed to apply or work in my particular case, I came across this article which provides this neat solution :
#container {
display: table;
}
#copyright {
display: table-footer-group;
}
I find it very useful for applying responsive design for mobile display without having to reorder all the html code of a website, setting body itself as a table.
Note that only the first table-footer-group or table-header-group will be rendered as such : if there are more than one, the others will be rendered as table-row-group.
You can indeed align the box to the bottom without using position:absolute if you know the height of the #container using the text alignment feature of inline-block elements.
Here you can see it in action.
This is the code:
#container {
/* So the #container most have a fixed height */
height: 300px;
line-height: 300px;
background:Red;
}
#container > * {
/* Restore Line height to Normal */
line-height: 1.2em;
}
#copyright {
display:inline-block;
vertical-align:bottom;
width:100%; /* Let it be a block */
background:green;
}
Using the translateY and top property
Just set element child to position: relative and than move it top: 100% (that's the 100% height of the parent) and stick to bottom of parent by transform: translateY(-100%) (that's -100% of the height of the child).
BenefitS
you do not take the element from the page flow
it is dynamic
But still just workaround :(
.copyright{
position: relative;
top: 100%;
transform: translateY(-100%);
}
Don't forget prefixes for the older browser.
CodePen link here.
html, body {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.overlay {
min-height: 100%;
position: relative;
}
.container {
width: 900px;
position: relative;
padding-bottom: 50px;
}
.height {
width: 900px;
height: 50px;
}
.footer {
width: 900px;
height: 50px;
position: absolute;
bottom: 0;
}
<div class="overlay">
<div class="container">
<div class="height">
content
</div>
</div>
<div class="footer">
footer
</div>
</div>
If you want it to "stick" to the bottom, regardless of the height of container, then absolute positioning is the way to go. Of course, if the copyright element is the last in the container it'll always be at the bottom anyway.
Can you expand on your question? Explain exactly what you're trying to do (and why you don't want to use absolute positioning)?
If you do not know the height of child block:
#parent {
background:green;
width:200px;
height:200px;
display:table-cell;
vertical-align:bottom;
}
.child {
background:red;
vertical-align:bottom;
}
<div id="parent">
<div class="child">child
</div>
</div>
http://jsbin.com/ULUXIFon/3/edit
If you know the height of the child block add the child block then add padding-top/margin-top:
#parent {
background:green;
width:200px;
height:130px;
padding-top:70px;
}
.child {
background:red;
vertical-align:
bottom;
height:130px;
}
<div id="parent">
<div class="child">child
</div>
</div>
You can use grid by assigning the available space to the content at the top:
#container {
display: grid;
grid-template-rows: 1fr auto;
height: 10rem; /* or 100% or anything */
}
<div id="container">
This is random content.
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
Also, if there's stipulations with using position:absolute; or position:relative;, you can always try padding parent div or putting a margin-top:x;. Not a very good method in most cases, but it may come in handy in some cases.
Solution for this specific scenario:
Place inner at the bottom of parent . The height of the parent is set by the height of its "tallest" sibling
The set up:
I have a row with multiple <div class="container">
These <div class="container"> are next to each other inside another <div class="supercontainer">
Each <div class="container"> has 3 inner divs on top of each other: <div class="title">, <div class="content">, <div class="footer">
The desired result:
All <div class="container"> have the same height. The height is not defined in px, it will be the height of the "tallest" among them.
<div class="title"> should be at the top of <div class="container">
<div class="content"> should be placed below <div class="title">
<div class="footer"> should be placed at the bottom of <div class="container"> without overlapping with the previous content
This is the current state: https://codepen.io/xavier-atero/pen/ExvWQww
.supercontainer {
border: solid 1px black;
display: flex;
}
.container, .other-container {
position: relative;
border: solid 1px red;
width: 200px;
margin: 10px;
}
.title {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px blue;
}
.content {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px cyan;
}
.footer {
margin: 10px;
background: lime;
}
<body>
<div class="supercontainer">
<div class="container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
<div class="other-container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top.
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title. This one is longer than the first one to stretch the parent div. Since it is longer, the footers of the two containers are not alinged.
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
__________ Solution with FLEXBOX __________
This is the outcome: https://codepen.io/xavier-atero/pen/MWvpBMz
.supercontainer {
border: solid 1px black;
display: flex;
}
.container, .other-container {
position: relative;
border: solid 1px red;
width: 200px;
margin: 10px;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.title {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px blue;
}
.content {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px cyan;
}
.footer {
margin: 10px;
background: lime;
margin-top: auto;
border: solid 1px fuchsia;
}
<body>
<div class="supercontainer">
<div class="container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
<div class="other-container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top.
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title. This one is longer than the first one to stretch the parent div. Since it is longer, the footers of the two containers are not alinged.
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
__________ Solution with TABLE-ROW __________
This is the outcome: https://codepen.io/xavier-atero/pen/rNzyKJm
.supercontainer {
border: solid 1px black;
display: flex;
}
.container, .other-container {
position: relative;
border: solid 1px red;
width: 200px;
margin: 10px;
border-collapse:collapse;
display : table;
}
.title {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px blue;
}
.content {
margin: 10px;
border: solid 1px cyan;
}
.footer {
margin: 10px;
background: lime;
border: solid 1px fuchsia;
display: table-row;
vertical-align: bottom;
height: 1px;
}
<body>
<div class="supercontainer">
<div class="container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
<div class="other-container">
<div class="title">
This part represents the title and it is placed on top.
</div>
<div class="content">
This one represents the body and it is placed below the title. This one is longer than the first one to stretch the parent div. Since it is longer, the footers of the two containers are not alinged.
</div>
<div class="footer">
And this one is the footer. It should always be at the bottom of the container
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
#container{width:100%; float:left; position:relative;}
#copyright{position:absolute; bottom:0px; left:0px; background:#F00; width:100%;}
#container{background:gray; height:100px;}
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
</div>
Don't wanna use "position:absolute" for sticky footer at bottom. Then you can do this way:
html,
body {
height: 100%;
margin: 0;
}
.wrapper {
min-height: 100%;
/* Equal to height of footer */
/* But also accounting for potential margin-bottom of last child */
margin-bottom: -50px;
}
.footer{
background: #000;
text-align: center;
color: #fff;
}
.footer,
.push {
height: 50px;
}
<html>
<body>
<!--HTML Code-->
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="content">content</div>
<div class="push"></div>
</div>
<footer class="footer">test</footer>
</body>
</html>
Here is an approach targeted at making an element with a known height and width (at least approximately) float to the right and stay at the bottom, while behaving as an inline element to the other elements. It is focused at the bottom-right because you can place it easily in any other corner through other methods.
I needed to make a navigation bar which would have the actual links at the bottom right, and random sibling elements, while ensuring that the bar itself stretched properly, without disrupting the layout. I used a "shadow" element to occupy the navigation bar's links' space and added it at the end of the container's child nodes.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
<span id="copyright-s">filler</span>
</div>
<style>
#copyright {
display:inline-block;
position:absolute;
bottom:0;
right:0;
}
#copyright-s {
float:right;
visibility:hidden;
width:20em; /* ~ #copyright.style.width */
height:3em; /* ~ #copyright.style.height */
}
</style>
Maybe this helps someone: You can always place the div outside the other div and then push it upwards using negative margin:
<div id="container" style="background-color: #ccc; padding-bottom: 30px;">
Hello!
</div>
<div id="copyright" style="margin-top: -20px;">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
Just because this hasn't been mentioned at all, what usually works well in situations like yours:
Placing the copyright-div after the container-div
You would only have to format the copyright-div in a similar way to the other container (same overall width, centering, etc.), and all is fine.
CSS:
#container, #copyright {
width: 1000px;
margin:0 auto;
}
HTML:
<div id="container">
<!-- Other elements here -->
</div>
<div id="copyright">
Copyright Foo web designs
</div>
The only time this might not be ideal is when your container-div is declared with height:100%, and the user would need to scroll down to see the copyright. But even still you could work around (e.g. margin-top:-20px - when the height of your copyright element is 20px).
No absolute positioning
No table layout
No crazy css, that looks different in every other browser (well IE at least, you know)
Simple and clear formatting
Aside: I know the OP asked for a solution that "... sticks to the bottom of the 'container' div ...", and not something under it, but come on, people are looking for good solutions here, and this is one!
There is nothing called float:bottom in CSS. The best way is using positioning in such cases:
position:absolute;
bottom:0;
For those only have one child in the container, you can use the table-cell and vertical-align approach which worked reliably for positioning a single div at the bottom of its parent.
Note that using table-footer-group as other answers mentioned will break the height calculation of parent table.
#container {
display: table;
width: 100%;
height: 200px;
}
#item {
display: table-cell;
vertical-align: bottom;
}
<div id="container">
<div id="item">Single bottom item</div>
</div>
According: w3schools.com
An element with position: absolute; is positioned relative to the
nearest positioned ancestor (instead of positioned relative to the
viewport, like fixed).
So you need to position the parent element with something either relative or absolute, etc and position the desired element to absolute and latter set bottom to 0.

Extend Div Into Parent Without Negative Margins

I would like to have a child div extend to be the same width as it's parent's parent. So with HTML structure like this:
<div class="pp">
<div class="p">
<p>
Some text
</p>
<div class="c">
This is the thingy!
</div>
<p>
Some more text
</p>
</div>
</div>
I would like div.c to extend to the borders of div.pp.
I know this is possible with negative margins, but in my situation I am not aware of the margins of div.pp beforehand. I'm aware I could write some JavaScript to do this, but I am interested in a CSS only solution. I'm also aware that changing the structure of the HTML could solve this problem, however that is also not an option.
Here is fiddle illustrating the HTML and some helpful CSS:
https://jsfiddle.net/y37mLkzu/1/
There is an example there of fixing this with negative margins.
I am not sure if this will work in your situation, but it is the only other way without using a fixed minus margin and only using pure CSS. I have added :before and :after to .c and absolute positioned them at either side of the .c element. I have also added overflow hidden to the .pp wrapper to cut off the excess absolute positioned elements.
p {
margin:0;
}
.pp {
padding: 0 6px 0 6px;
width: 100px;
background-color: black;
overflow: hidden;
}
.p {
background-color:white;
}
.c {
background-color:red;
position: relative;
}
.c:before, .c:after {
content:"";
position: absolute;
top:0;
background: red;
height:100%;
width:100%;
}
.c:before {
left:-100%;
}
.c:after {
right:-100%;
}
<div class="pp">
<div class="p">
<p>
Some text
</p>
<div class="c">
This is the thingy!
</div>
<p>
Some more text
</p>
</div>
</div>
Cant you use positions? Just curious to know. If I use position:absolute, it will work.

CSS: floating, absolute position and overflow

HTML
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="image"></div>
<div class="copy">blabla</div>
<div class="outside"></div>
</div>
CSS
.wrapper { width: 960px; margin: 0 auto; position: relative; }
.image { float: left; }
.outside { position: absolute; top: 0; left: -20px; }
I want .outside to extend outside the .wrapper, however there are two problems: as is, .wrapper does not extend down to accommodate for the floated .image; setting .wrapper to overflow: auto fixes the height issue, but hides the absolutely positioned .outside. How can I get both the height to stretch automatically and not have the absolutely positioned element be cut off?
EDIT: my wrapper is set to relative, sorry - forgot to add that. For further clarification, here are some crappy diagrams:
EDIT 2: I got it to work by adding a wrapper around the image and copy and setting it to overflow: auto. I wanted to avoid unnecessary markup, but oh well... Thanks everyone!
You just need to clear your float.
Add another empty div like:
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="image"></div>
<div class="copy">blabla</div>
<div class="outside"></div>
<div class="clearfix"></div>
</div>
CSS:
.clearfix { clear: both; }
Float the wrapper (add float: left to the css for .wrapper), or put <BR style="clear: both;"> after the floated image.
Put the absolute div outside the wrapper, rather than inside it.
But why are you doing position absolute? I bet you don't need to do that, and if you gave more info on what you are trying to do there might be an alternative.
Position absolute will position it absolutely to the body unless its parent has a position other than static. If you want it positioned absolutely to the parent (.wrapper), you need to give .wrapper a position such as position:relative;
Then, add a div to clear your floats:
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="image"></div>
<div class="copy">blabla</div>
<div class="clear"></div>
<div class="outside"></div>
</div>
CSS:
.wrapper {
background-color:red;
width: 200px;
margin: 0 auto;
position:relative;
}
.clear {
clear:both;
}
.image {
float: left;
}
.outside {
background-color:yellow;
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: -20px;
width:100px;
height:20px;
}
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/AlienWebguy/6Fmy2/
Resolved by adding an additional wrapper with overflow: auto around .image and .copy.

Absolute positioning with a flow panel

Can this be done?
It seems like this should be possible. In general, I want the whole panel (div) to flow as you would usually expect within the body. However, I'd like to absolutely position the controls within the panel.
My experience is that when I try to absolutely position a control within a flow panel, the controls are not treated as being contained by the panel with relative coordinates of it container.
You can do this with a flow panel in WinForms and I like the mix of approaches. In my mind, it would be the best of both worlds, though I expect responses saying it would be a bad thing.
Comments?
Change the CSS 'position' property of the <div> to 'relative'. If your HTML looks like:
<body>
<div id="container">
<a id="control">start</a>
</div>
</body>
then update the CSS to:
#container {
position: relative;
}
#control {
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: 0;
}
The #control element will now be relative to the #container.
Given this HTML:
<div class="panel">
<h2>Panel title</h2>
<div class="close">x</div>
<div class="content">Panel content</div>
</div>
You can use this CSS:
div.panel{
position:relative;
}
div.panel h2,
div.panel div.close,
div.panel div.content{
position:absolute;
}
<div class="panel"> will remain in the usual document flow, while each of its children will be absolutely positioned within that panel.
If you set the div to have position: relative, any child elements of the div can be absolutely positioned within the div by setting them to have position: absolute.
Example:
HTML:
<div id='panel'>
<div id='control'>I'm positioned absolutely!</div>
</div>
CSS:
#panel { position: relative; width: 300px; height: 100px;}
#control { position: absolute; top: 10px; left: 20px;