I'm trying to create a horizontally scrolling list. I'm going to replace this with a fancy version when Javascript is enabled, but I want the markup and css to look and work fine without Javascript on reasonably modern browsers (any suggestions that uses Javascript in any way is off).
My current markup/css works, but here's what I don't like about it:
The current markup specify a very wide ul (i.e. 10000px) and a container that scrolls on this. Is there a way to avoid this and instead have the width expands based on its content (i.e. the blue background shouldn't be there)?
There are two extraneous divs (those with id #extra1, #extra2) that is just for styling purpose. Is there a way to eliminate this extra div?
If there is not enough image to fill the page width, the scrollbar should collapse, but currently it does not because I have a very wide ul which cannot collapse.
The <a> tag are separated by the horizontal list, I preferably want to keep them together. Is there a way to have them close together and cleanly separate them in CSS?
Aside, do you know of any tutorials that discussed this sort of thing? I've seen several tutorials that demonstrated having the whole page to scroll, and I took some ideas from those, but I can't find any that demonstrated scrolling ul/ol element.
Extra info that might help:
The width of the page is static (i.e. it is not fluid/elastic layout).
The images in the page is dynamically generated from PHP, and the number of images can change.
The width of the thumbnails are well-defined.
Stripped down live example: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17261360/horiz.html
Update (2018): The original solution based on display: inline is over 7 years old now. In today's world, I would recommend the flexbox approach, because it gives you full control over the gaps that appear between the images.
Using flexbox
Check browser compatibility first (you're probably fine), and add prefixes as needed.
ul.images {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
display: flex;
flex-direction: row;
width: 900px;
overflow-x: auto;
}
ul.images li {
flex: 0 0 auto;
width: 150px;
height: 150px;
}
<ul class="images">
<!-- Inline styles added for demonstration purposes only. -->
<li style="background-color: #dff">...</li>
<li style="background-color: #fdf">...</li>
<li style="background-color: #ffd">...</li>
</ul>
Using display: inline
This works for me, tested in Firefox 4 beta 10, would be advisable to test it in IE as well:
ul.images {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
white-space: nowrap;
width: 900px;
overflow-x: auto;
}
ul.images li {
display: inline;
}
<ul class="images">
<!-- Inline styles added for demonstration purposes only. -->
<li style="background-color: #dff">...</li>
<li style="background-color: #fdf">...</li>
<li style="background-color: #ffd">...</li>
</ul>
The trick in the CSS is to set the lis to display: inline, so they are treated as characters and placed next to each other, and set white-space:nowrap on the ul so that no line breaking is done. You cannot specify a size on inline elements, but they will be stretched to fit the img elements inside them. The scrolling is then simply overflow-x: auto on the parent ul element.
Adding prev/next buttons could be done with position:absolute, or with float:left, or whatever other method you fancy.
Using display: inline-block
Similar to the previous approach, but allowing us to set a size on each individual image block:
ul.images {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
white-space: nowrap;
width: 900px;
overflow-x: auto;
}
ul.images li {
display: inline-block;
width: 150px;
height: 150px;
}
<ul class="images">
<!-- Inline styles added for demonstration purposes only. -->
<li style="background-color: #dff">...</li>
<li style="background-color: #fdf">...</li>
<li style="background-color: #ffd">...</li>
</ul>
Related
enter image description hereI got stack by a simple thing...
I am trying to create a simple navigation for my footer. So, I created a and placed an in it. The list contains three s and each of them has an inside. I wish my list items to be placed horizontally with spaces between / around them. Thus, I decided to use flexbox in this case. The question is that when I am setting display property value of my to flex and justify-content to center, it work predictably (i.e. all the list items sticked to each other are centered horizontally), however, as soon as I set justify-content to "space-between" or "space-around" I get an extra space to the right side of my content, which makes this space three times bigger than the one on the left side of the content.
I tried to search this topic in the history, but found nothing similar. Google search brought me a potential solution - to set flex:1 to each of the list items. But in this case I loose the gaps between the items which is not my intention.
Below I provide a picture of the problem and my testing code snippets. One more observation is that everything works great in code snippets programs (JSFiddle or Code Pen)...
Problem illustration
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
.footer {
height: 100vh;
background: grey;
position: relative;
}
.container {
width: 90%;
height: 30vh;
margin: auto;
position: absolute;
top: 20%;
left: 50%;
transform: translateX(-50%);
}
.nav {
background: white;
height: 100%;
}
.list {
height: 100%;
list-style-type: none;
text-align: center;
display: flex;
flex-wrap: wrap;
justify-content: space-around;
align-items: center;
}
.item {
min-width: 30%;
background: grey;
}
<div class="footer">
<div class="container">
<nav class="nav">
<ul class="list">
<li class="item">1</li>
<li class="item">2</li>
<li class="item">3</li>
</ul>
</nav>
</div>
</div>
Your code snippet is ok. In your screenshot it seems you have a lot more css going on, though.
I can't see the complete CSS-snippet in your screenshot and I might be completely wrong: It looks like a piece of the clearfix-hack where you are missing the ::before part.
Because adding an empty space only in ::after will have exactly the effect you are describing.
It probably is the remains of a former float-construct, so you can just remove the ::after part.
I cannot figure this out. I would like 3 images to sit side by side inside a 930px wide div.
so, when you enter into responsive design mode, or drag the screen browser width wise to make it smaller all the 3 images stay side by side inside the div without wrapping to the next line.
But automatically start to re-size to fit the re-sized div.
The 3 images only start to resize correctly inside the div only when the 3rd image has wrapped under the second image. So it looks like this below.
[]
[]
[]
Once all the images are vertically aligned the images then start to shrink down correctly. But this image wrapping under the next image is no good for me, as when viewing the website on a mobile phone, or when re-sizing the screen the images are still super large.
Must be a way to stop these images from wrapping underneath each other, and just stay inline but automatically re-size themselves
as the div/page width shrinks down?
I've tried white-space: nowrap; display: inline; inline-block; even display: table-cell; nothing seems
to do what I need it to do. However, if I use only one image instead of 2, or 3 then it works perfectly fine.
You're probably thinking why not just put all 3 images inside 1 image in photoshop? Well each img is an href link, so that's not possible.
Even floating the images all to the left still doesn't help.
Here's my CSS/HTML
img {
max-width: 100%;
height: auto;
}
then
<div style="width: 930px; max-width: 100%; border: 1px solid blue;">
<img src="camera.png"> <img src="lights.png"> <img src="action.png">
</div>
Can someone tell me where I may be going wrong please? How can I stop images wrapping underneath other images when the parent container shrinks down.
I've had to resort to using multiple #media queries of different pre-fixed image sizes per break-point. But there's got to be a much much easier way. Something so simple that I'm missing.
I figure I might share a flexbox solution as well. I've included the code below so it should be relatively self explanatory. Feel free to leave a comment below if you think I should clarify anything.
.container{
display: flex;
flex-direction: row;
flex-wrap: nowrap;
align-items: flex-start;
}
img {
flex: 1;
max-width: 100%;
height: auto;
max-height: 310px;
}
<div class="container" style="width: 930px; max-width: 100%; border: 1px solid blue;">
<img src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/44336734/fujifilmx100t-1.0.0.jpg">
<img src="https://d3k7s9wfq6lao0.cloudfront.net/latest/37504/main/7.jpg">
<img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Clapperboard%2C_O2_film%2C_September_2008.jpg">
</div>
you can use inline-block for this. you will need to alter the width with media queries as your screen gets smaller
img {
display:inline-block;
width: 33%;
height: auto;
}
you should also wrap the images in a div.container and give this div a width:100%
Image width set to 100% occupy all the horizontal space of the container, since you want to fit three images inline to each other, divide the 100% by 3 so that when the container is resized the three images will occupy one third of the available space. The margin-left: -2px is to make sure that the image border don't touch the edge, otherwise it will wrap to new line. Try this sample:
CSS:
img {
display: inline-block;
width: 33%;
height: auto;
margin-left: -2px;
box-sizing: border-box;
}
HTML element:
<div style="width: 930px; max-width: 100%; border: 1px solid blue;">
<img src="camera.png">
<img src="lights.png">
<img src="action.png">
</div>
My answers' more or less a follow up to Tom's which I'm writing on here so I don't overflow the comments section.
The problem with max-width: 100% is that the relative sizing doesn't start to kick in until each image outgrows its parent, in this case, the div. Since all images have a default absolute size based on their image src they force themselves onto a new line before resizing and so only then will max-width start doing what you want it to. As per Tom's response, the percentage sizing of 33% forces the images to have a relative size which causes them to shrink immediately.
Naturally 'img' tags are given the display of inline which means you could opt to just use the following code:
img {
width: 33.3%;
}
Now here's the biggest gotcha I had when dealing with inline images.
A display of inline and inline-block is respective of the whitespace
that exists within your HTML markup.
Therefore the small presence of whitespace below whilst not evident is enough to cause images to still move over to a new line.
img {
width: 33.3%;
}
<div style="width: 930px; max-width: 100%; border: 1px solid blue;">
<img src="https://picsum.photos/250/250/?random1">
<img src="https://picsum.photos/250/250/?random2">
<img src="https://picsum.photos/250/250/?random3">
</div>
But once this whitespace is removed the images all fit perfectly across the screen whilst resizing.
img {
width: 33.3%;
}
<div style="width: 930px; max-width: 100%; border: 1px solid blue;"><img src="https://picsum.photos/250/250/?random1"><img src="https://picsum.photos/250/250/?random2"><img src="https://picsum.photos/250/250/?random3"></div>
Now compressing the HTML markup above makes it rather unwieldy and so as an alternative, you could opt to use the floating method. By setting a float of left for each image you'll force each 'img' tag to sit flush, regardless of the extra spacing between them. Just be sure to give the parent div a float of left as well or an overflow of auto to stop it from collapsing.
img {
width: 33.3%;
float: left;
}
After many days testing various ways out here's the perfect way to do this without flex. Make sure each image is wrapped in its own div that's important.
<style>
* {
box-sizing: border-box;
}
img {
width: 100%;
max-width: 100%;
height: auto;
}
.column {
float: left;
width: 33.33%;
padding: 5px;
}
/* Clearfix (clear floats) */
.row::after {
content: "";
clear: both;
display: table;
}
</style>
Now, here's where I've changed it up a little bit for more flexibility. Since each image is now in its own div we can then make the image width: 100%; or max-width: 100%; then add the width: 33.33%; part that used to be under img {} to each of the new 3 div columns instead.
<div class="row">
<div class="column"> /* 33.33% width */
<img src="flash-tooltip.png">
</div>
<div class="column"> /* 33.33% width */
<img src="html-tooltip.png">
</div>
<div class="column"> /* 33.33% width */
<img src="portables-tooltip.png">
</div>
</div>
Lot's of people provided great advice.
The easiest way is using flex. But, something people don't tell you when using flexbox. You should still wrap each of the images inside their own div container. Otherwise, you will get some weird things happening when you encase them in hyperlink anchors, that is if all three images are just placed inside the first flex container div. And without their own div container images won't keep any kind aspect ratio when they shrink/enlarge. They just squash and skew together.
And finally very important! Always make sure any images inside a flex container is set up the same way. Either width: 100%; or max-width: 100%; otherwise, the images will not shrink up/down at all in Google Chrome.
I've included this same method as above, only this time in a flexbox version.
We have a sticky side panel on our page implemented with the following very-simple CSS:
position: fixed;
top:62px;
bottom:10px;
Where the top and bottom properties create the desired margins.
The problem is that this panel contains several accordion-style elements, and expanding some of them causes the content to overflow past the bottom of the screen and become invisible/inaccessible. Adding an overflow:auto; rule to the above css style almost solves the problem, by inserting a scrollbar that allows the user to scroll vertically to see the would-be hidden content. However, this results in two scrollbars - one for the main nav and one for the sidebar - which feels clunky an unintuitive. Instead, I'd like to have the "fixed" element scroll with the main scrollbar when it overflows. I'm aware that this would essentially make it not a fixed element, and thus am afraid I'll have to resort to JS to make this happen - but does anyone have a cleaner, html/css-only way of handling this?
I'm not sure this is what you need, but hope it helps some way.
#container1 {
height: 400px;
width: 200px;
overflow: hidden;
position: fixed;
top: 62px;
bottom: 10px;
background: #888;
}
#container2 {
width: 100%;
height: 99%;
overflow: auto;
padding-right: 20px; /*Adjust this for cross-browser compatibility */
}
#container2 ul li {
height: 300px;
}
html, body {
height: 99%;
overflow:hidden;
}
<div id="container1">
<div id="container2">
<ul>
<li>test1</li>
<li>test2</li>
<li>test3</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
JSFiddle
Also in chrome you can try out:
::-webkit-scrollbar {
display: none;
}
But this snippet works only in chrome, so I would rather use the above.
Let me try to help. Use Panel-body class selector to handle this.
First you should do many things, such as, width of the div and the second div.
You can manage to hide the scrollbar as follows:
.panel-body {
height:300px;
overflow:auto;
margin-right:0px; // when it shows scrollbar, you need to set it MINUS.
}
Second, you also take notice when browser window gets resized by user and you need to manage Media Queries in related to the div width.
This is the DEMO.
I'm trying to create some evenly spaced columns (an ol), with the columns themselves being fixed width.
So far, I've managed to achieve the desired effect by using table layout, and nesting an additional element inside the list item.
HTML:
<ol>
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
<li><div></div></li>
</ol>
CSS:
ol {
display: table;
width: 100%;
}
li {
display: table-cell;
}
div {
margin: 0 auto;
width: 100px;
height: 250px;
}
This works great, but has the following 2 shortcomings:
As you can see in the demo, the first & last columns don't line up flush with the parent's outer edges.
This can't really be used responsively. The only thing you can do at smaller widths is stack them, but I'd like to split them (2 or 3 per row).
Is what I'm after even possible in CSS alone? I know there are a plethora of ways to accomplish this in JS, but I'm after a CSS-only solution.
P.S. I don't care about IE7-, but I do need to support IE8. CSS3 selectors are OK though, since I'm anyhow using selectivizr in the project (I know that's JS ;-)).
It seems appropriate for you to recycle "how to *really* justify a horizontal menu". Basically the behaviour you're describing is that of inline-block elements of identical width having text-align:justify applied:
ol {
/*force the desired behaviour*/
text-align: justify;
/*remove the minimum gap between columns caused by whitespace*/
font-size: 0;
}
li {
/*make text-align property applicable*/
display: inline;
}
/*force "justify" alignment that requires text to be at least over 2 lines*/
ol:after {
content: "";
display: inline-block;
position: relative;
width: 100%;
height: 0;
}
div {
display: inline-block;
width: 100px;
height: 250px;
}
Working fiddle.
NB: you may have to re-apply desired font-size and text-align to descendants of ol depending on the reset you're using (i.e. to prevent these properties from being inherited)
Ok my first thought would be to use media queries to gain a responsive approach for how many you want to show per row on differing screen sizes and my second would be to use
box-sizing:border-box;
-moz-box-sizing:border-box;
-webkit-box-sizing:border-box;
this will stop the paddings you may put in later adding onto the box model size.
Hope this is close to what you are after.
Everything online points me to stop using tables, which I've tried my best to do, but I've come across a problem which tables seems to be the only solution for. I have 5 inline-block elements that I want spaced evenly across 100% of the width of the page. I put a width of 20% on the style and set the margin and padding to zero. When I view the page, everything looks pretty good except for the horizontal scrollbar added to the page. If I put these elements in a 100% width table with 5 columns this isn't a problem. In this case do I need to use a table or is there a better solution?
BTW, I've tried this in both Chrome and IE8.
Update: Something I've discovered is that a ~5px gap is being inserted between my elements (found by putting a background-color on them). I have no clue why, as nothing in my styles denotes this:
<div class="links">
Previous
Current
Next
01/01/2011
01/08/2011
</div>
.links
{
white-space: nowrap;
width: 100%;
}
.links a
{
display: inline-block;
width: 20%;
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
color: White;
background-color: #4C8331;
}
Another update:
After JMC Creative pointed out my dumb mistake of putting spaces between the anchors that almost fixed the issue, but now there is one pixel of scrollbar. I see no inherited style that should cause this.
Try putting them in a container. Like so:
#container {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
width: 100%;
}
#boxes {
float: left;
width: 20%;
}
Your html markup has a space in between the a tags. So therefore it's being rendered as 5 blocks which are 20% wide and 4 spaces of roughly 4px each. So you end up with 100% + 16px.
Edit
In order to solve the scrollbar that is plaguing you in IE, you could set up a conditional comment like so:
<!--[if IE]>
<style type="text/css"> .links { overflow: hidden; } </style>
<![endif]-->
Be sure your body and html set to margin: 0; padding: 0;.
Have you tried using overflow: hidden? Or more specifically overflow-y: hidden?
You want to float your anchors. Doing it this way works for me.
CSS:
.links {
width: 100%;
}
.links>a {
float: left;
display: inline-block;
width: 20%;
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
color: #fff;
background-color: #4C8331;
}
HTML:
<div class="links">
Previous
Current
Next
01/01/2011
01/08/2011
</div>
You may get a scrollbar or see some of the anchors wrapped to another line if there isn't room to fit them all on the page (ie, content overflows the width). I will note that I have seen IE get this wrong and incorrectly wrap when it shouldn't. It seems like a rounding issue and could be worked around.