I want a parent div to stretch when the child table width goes beyond page width.
what would be the best css solution for this?
Setting the div to display: inline-block appears to do the trick.
You can use display: table; as well. (DIV)
In my case (XHTML transitional 1.0 doctype) I had structure like
<div>
<table>
<tr>
<td>
<img width="1800px" height="600px" />
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
As I found in CSS rules, table had
table-layout: fixed;
When I removed this rule, everything got fixed.
Related
I have a div within which a table would lie. Now I want this div to have its width set automatically to the width of table within it.
For example:
<div>
<table>
<tr>
<td>Hello</td>
<td>World</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Sample</td>
<td>Table</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
I tried giving float: left; property to it. It works, but then it creates another problem. Whatever content is put after this div gets placed to the right of it in the empty space.
What needs to be done?
You are effectively attempting to change the display model of that div element, so you should change it's CSS 'display' property as follows:
div{
display: inline-block;
}
Here's a jsFiddle demonstrating the solution.
You have to clear the float after your div by adding style="clear: left;" on your consecutive element:
<div style="float: left;">
<table>...</table>
</div>
<div style="clear: left;">
...
</div>
This is quite new but...
If you don't want the element to become inline-block, you can do this:
.parent{
width: min-content;
}
You have a lot of other options for configuring the width. Read more here: http://caniuse.com/#search=intrinsic
You need to clear the float explicitly in order to not impair subsequent elements by the float. See this article for details.
If i understand correctly, you want the div to be as wide as the table but not any wider. Since the div-element is a block element, it will always be as wide as it can be unless you give it an explicit width.
Your choice is to either add the style display:inline or use an inline-element like "span".
I have a <table> inside a <div> tag, which doesn't want to span as long as it needs to be. I need to specify a width in px for the <table> to span and thus cause the <div> container it is inside to scroll. Otherwise, the <table> just spans to a width of 100%, i.e. the width of the <div>.
My example is as follows:
<div style="width:880px; overflow:scroll;">
<table> // I need to explicitly specify a width for it, otherwise it just span 100% which is incorrect
<tr><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr>
</table>
</div>
I have specified for all the <td> tags a width inside my CSS.
I don't understand why the <table> can't determine it's own width or just respect the widths of all the <td> tags.
Try setting white-space: nowrap; on the td in your table and dump a lot of text inside each td you will start seeing a scroll bar on your div.
Are you sure there isn't any unintended CSS being applied to the table? By default the table only expands to accommodate its columns.
<div style="width:880px; overflow:scroll; background-color: green;">
<table style="background-color: red;">
<tr>
<td>one</td>
<td>two</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
Using this code, you can see the red table is only as big as its columns in relation to the green div as long as no other CSS is involved.
Use a tool like Firebug or IE's Developer Tools (F12) to see which styles are actually being applied to the table element.
See the example here.
I have a layout where I need tabs at the top, and content to fill the rest of the space.
So to make the bottom content div stretch I would need to have:
style="height:100% - 20px;"
Where 20px is the height of my tabs. Obviously that code isn't valid but it illustrates my point. So what I tried next was a table where the td in the fist tr had a set height(20px) and the td in the bottom row had no height set. The table was set to 100% both ways. And this does work, the bottom td stretches to fill. However as soon as I put the code in the project I am working on it doesn't work, and this is because of the doctype the project is using(which I cannot change):
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
The reason I say it doesn't work is that inside that content td there is a div set to 100% width and height, and unless the td its in has a defined height it doesn't seem to be able to see what 100% is, and simply adjusts the the minimum size it can be according to its content.
It doesn't need to be a table layout, i would prefer div's actually - but either way.
Thanks
Does this help?
http://www.themaninblue.com/writing/perspective/2005/08/29/
I know it's mainly to do with a footer but a side-effect of that is to stretch the content to 100% height.
AS far as I understood your question, using a table for anything other than tabular data is a serious no go area.
Check out this Dynamic Drive script for tabbed content article, it might help you out a lot :)
Edit:
<div>
<h4>Heading</h4>
<div>
<ul>
<li><a>Tab</a></li>
<li><a>Tab</a></li>
<li><a>Tab</a></li>
</ul>
<div>Content for Tab 1</div>
<div>Content for Tab 2</div>
<div>Content for Tab 3</div>
</div>
</div>
I believe this is a much better way to lay it out, then it's all wrapped in one div that can define it's own height :)
Try setting the height of the tr elements instead of the td (in IE6 it still won't work).
Or try something like this:
<style type="text/css">
html, body, .wrapper {
height: 100%;
width: 100%;
margin: 0;
}
.head {
height: 20px;
}
</style>
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="head">header</div>
<p>content</p>
</div>
I don't know if that's what you're looking for (since I don't really understand your needs, and you got so many jQuery addons for that...)
did you try
<table width="100%" height="100%">
<tr style="height:20px; display:block;">
<td>pwet</td>
<td>test</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height:100%;width:100%;">
<td style="background:red; width:50%;"></td>
<td style="background:blue; width:50%;"></td>
</tr>
</table>
EDIT : Since you're using table, the td's from the first tr should be a th and the first tr should be wrapped with a thead
I'm trying to do the following: http://www.pastebin.org/113337
I'm wondering why the scrolling won't take place? It just stretches the table. Try running the code with and without white-space: nowrap and see how it differs. Whenever I apply nowrap my table gets stretched. How do I avoid this?
I'm pretty sure that's just how tables work; they stretch when there's too much content in one of their cells.
Try putting a <div> inside your <td> and apply the width and overflow properties to that instead.
Addendum:
Your table has a CSS width property of 150px while the div has a percentage, %100. Try giving the <div> a non-percentage width...
<table>
<tr>
<td>
<div style="150px;">
<!-- wtv -->
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
Or try putting the whole <table> in a <div> with a fixed width...
<div style="width:150px">
<table>
<!-- wtv -->
</table>
</div>
... lastly, I'd advise that you put your CSS in an external .css file ;)
I feel like this should be a no brainer, but clearly I'm missing something...
I'm stuck with an HTML table on a page, and need to absolutely position an element that is rendered inside of the table so that it can display properly when we apply DHTML to show it.
I tried absolutely positioning it relative to the bottom of a table row, but the browser (FF and IE) will not render it relative to the row. Instead it takes the positioning relative to the next parent above the row that has relative positioning.
Basically it is:
<table>
<tr class="aRelativelyPositionedClass">
<td>
<div class="anAbsolutelyPositionedClass">stuff I want to absolutely position</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
Is it possible to position the inner div relative to the row? Or is there an HTML issue I'm missing with tables?
According to the http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#choose-position discussion of relative: "The effect of 'position:relative' on table-row-group, table-header-group, table-footer-group, table-row, table-column-group, table-column, table-cell, and table-caption elements is undefined."
The problem is that Firefox, Google Chrome, Opera and Safari have chosen for position:relative to do nothing on a table-row. IMHO, they should have implemented the change of frame-of-reference, so that absolutely-positioned subelements will be rendered relative to the table-row, but they didn't.
My need to absolutely-position elements in a row occurred in JavaScript, so I had an easy solution. If the element's display is table-row, change it to block, THEN set position:relative. I realize this doesn't help you if you're trying to do it all soley using HTML and CSS. But in my situation, setting display:block before position:relative worked.
I don't think that you can position it relative to the row, as the row is not really a visible element.
You should be able to position it relative to the cell by setting the style position:relative on the cell to make it a layer. Still the cell is not an independent element, so you may have to put another div in the cell and make that a layer instead to make it work properly.
(Tables are problematic for layout when you combine it with other techniques... Perhaps you should consider removing the table altogehter...)
CSS 2.1 Specification:
The effect of 'position:relative' on
table-row-group, table-header-group,
table-footer-group, table-row,
table-column-group, table-column,
table-cell, and table-caption elements
is undefined.
So the browsers fall back to the next parent whose behavior is considered defined: table.
One solution is to force those rows to display as blocks:
tr.aRelativelyPositionedClass {
display: block;
}
If there's nothing else in the table cell apart from the div you want to position, it's possible that it's collapsing to zero dimensions when you move the div out of the flow with the absolute positioning, and this is throwing your calculations out. Is there an explicit height set on the row or the cell?
Edit:
I think Guffa is correct. With just one div in the cell I couldn't get it to position relative to either the row or the cell. I think you could fake the effect you're looking for by adding some markup:
<table border="1">
<tr style="position:relative;">
<td><img src="http://sstatic.net/so/img/so/logo.png" height="61px" width="250px" alt=""/></td>
<td>
<div style="position: relative; height: 100px; width: 100px;">
<div style="border: 1px solid red; position: absolute; bottom: -10px; left -10px;">Position me</div>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
try in CSS
.aRelativelyPositionedClass td {
// your style
}
I believe you would have to explicitly state relative too.
Paste this in a file to see how it's done.
Remember to set the container's size. I did it in HTML here to keep the example short, but you should do that in CSS.
<table border="1" width="500">
<tr height="200">
<td>
<div style="position:relative;top:20;left:20">stuff I want to position</div>
<div style="position:relative;top:30;left:30">stuff I want to position</div>
<div style="position:relative;top:40;left:40">stuff I want to position</div>
<div style="position:relative;top:50;left:50">stuff I want to position</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr height="200">
<td>
<div style="position:relative;top:20;left:20">stuff I want to position</div>
<div style="position:relative;top:30;left:30">stuff I want to position</div>
<div style="position:relative;top:40;left:40">stuff I want to position</div>
<div style="position:relative;top:50;left:50">stuff I want to position</div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
The solution is very simple: Put a DIV position=relative, immediately inside the TD.
TR and TD elements don't support 'position' being set -- so they can't be properly set to 'position=relative', to be the container for your positioning.
This is CSS specification & browsers use special CSS position-values to implement row & cell behaviour of the table.
<td>
<div style='position:relative;'> <!-- relative container for positioning -->
<!-- DIVs to be positioned, go in here. -->
</div>
See also:
Using Position Relative/Absolute within a TD?