I'm generating a page for an upcoming portal site, and I've got an HTML element with some optional content. I'd like the element to not render if it is empty, but adding some padding to it causes it to render. How do I add padding to the content, but only if content is present?
.someElement{padding-top: 5px;}
HTML in question:
<div class="someElement">With padded content</div>
<div class="someElement"><!-- shouldn't render since it has no content --></div>
Basically, I'd like the second element, above, to not take up any space. I'm testing in all major browsers, using XHTML 1.1 doctype.
You can do the trick with the CSS3 pseudo-class :empty
.someElement
{
// your standard style
}
.someElement:empty
{
display:none;
}
Sadly Internet explorer doesn't support that feauture yet. For all the other browsers it shall do just fine...
Give the element an id attribute. You can then use Javascript to check it's innerHTML property once the page has loaded. If innerHTML has a length of zero, then you can set it's display property to none. This page might help if you don't know your javascript.
This is still a mucky way to play. If you know the element shouldn't be rendered before you serve the page it would be better to omit it altogether. If you don't want to omit the element, just hide it, then force it into hiding; style="display: none"
<style>
.someElement{padding-top: 5px; display:table;}
</style>
<div class="someElement">With padded content</div>
<div class="someElement"><!-- shouldn't render since it has no content --></div>
Adding display:table; should do the trick.
Give the empty element a different class (say someHiddenElement) when you are generating the content. Then add someHiddenElement { display: none } to your style sheet.
If it's necessary to have the div.someElement in the HTML, the best CSS/HTML way to do that would be to add an extra div around the added content that has the padding property
.someElement > div{padding-top:5px;}
<div class="someElement"><div>Content</div></div>
Otherwise, do as Pekka says, or take a look at having javascript do it for you.
I can't think of a CSS only way to do that.
I would try to decide whether the element is rendered at the time I know whether there will be any content in it. That is probably the cleanest solution.
Don't use padding on container, use margin on content. Than when there is no content, container remains invisible.
At the point where you populate the optional div, if there is no text to put in it, try changing the CSS display property to none. According to this source (and others), display: none removes the element completely from the document. It does not take up any space, even though the HTML for it is still in the source code.
Related
Just like removeAttribute in JavaScript, after which the element won't be visible in the source.
You cannot remove an element from the DOM tree using CSS. You can only prevent it from being rendered in the layout with display: none; doing so does not prevent it from responding to events or cause it to be ignored by CSS selectors such as + and :nth-child(). You won't be able to interact with an element that's not there so you wouldn't be able to trigger events the usual way, but its "essence" remains, so to speak.
Its not possible with CSS.
Even if you use display:none, the element will be still in DOM tree.
CSS is for styling not for DOM manipulation. Use JavaScript for that.
display: none;
'Unlike the visibility property, which leaves an element in normal document flow,display: none removes the element completely from the document. It does not take up any space, even though the HTML for it is still in the source code. This is because it is, indeed, removed from the document flow. For all intents and purposes, the item is gone. This can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what your intentions are. It can also be damaging to your page if you misuse this property!'
https://www.lifewire.com/display-none-vs-visibility-hidden-3466884
You can use display: none to hide an element but it will still be on the DOM.
You can also use visibility: hidden and it will also still be on the DOM but the DOM will reflect the same vertical flow even though the element is hidden. In other words if the element is a block, a block space will still be reserved for the hidden element. And with display: none the space will also be removed along with the element as it is hidden.
Unless you use JavaScript, with CSS you are only changing the visibility of a DOM element that is existent on the DOM. Which can absolutely serve your purpose depending on what you are trying to do.
If you need more help, just comment with more detail and I'd be glad to help.
You actually can. Not directly in CSS but in combination with Javascript/jQuery you could.
In HTML give a class of "removeFromDom" to the Elements you want to have removed.
<p class="removeFromDom">your text here</p>
In CSS you add these Lines to make it invisible, if JS is not working.
.removeFromDom { display:none !important; visibility:hidden !important; }
In a jQuery file, that you load on any site, create this function::
$(document).ready(function() {
$(".removeFromDom").remove();
});
Et voila.. your jQuery file removes your Items from the DOM. I wouldn't recommend it for security reasons if there is a link nobody should be able to see anytime..
I have a situation where I would like an HTML img which has not yet loaded to have a pre-set height. The reason is that this height will be used in a calculation that may fire before the image is fully loaded and needs to remain accurate. I tried the following:
<div>hello<img src='http://example.com/invalid.gif' class="testimage"> there</div>
and put in some css
.testimage {
height: 200px;
width: 200px;
}
and at least in Firefox 5, the extra space is not rendered (and oddly, the broken image doesn't show either, just a blank space). That is, until I add display: inline-block. In at least some other browsers the default display of inline produces the desired result. Is this expected? If so, why?
Here's a jsFiddle as well: http://jsfiddle.net/uYXD4/
it says here that images are inline elements - http://htmlhelp.com/reference/html40/special/img.html
On the other hand take a look here - Is <img> element block level or inline level?
It looks like the <img> element is kind of both inline and block. No strict rules defining it, so probably the browser vendors make their own decisions about the defaults. So your best bet is to reset their assumptions to display: inline-block
Images are replaced elements:
An element whose content is outside the scope of the CSS formatting model, such as an image, embedded document, or applet. For example, the content of the HTML IMG element is often replaced by the image that its "src" attribute designates.
For replaced elements, display: inline-block is supposed to have the same exact same efffect as display: inline, which is the default.
So this may be a possible explanation for that strange behaviour in some browsers*:
They treat only completely loaded images as replaced elements, and otherwise treat them as non-replaced elements. That makes sense after all, and the standard does not explicitly disallow that. As a consequence, there's 3 possible scenarios:
replaced element, inline or inline-block doesn't matter, height property works
inline non-replaced element, height attribute has no effect
inline-block non-replaced element, height property works
Loaded images always qualify as 1., and broken/loading images may qualify as 1. or 2. (or 3. if you set display: inline-block explicitly)
*Not sure if that's how things actually work though.
Why not use something like
<img src="..." width=400 height=200>
I'm doing the exact same thing and it works quite well. Another option is...
$('.myimg').load( function() { /* ops */ } );
though I don't know if that waits to load the image in ALL browsers or not
Can anyone explain to me why can we style the element html?
What are differences between it and body?
I usually see tutorials and multiple websites using body and never html, I only found about it when using YUI 3: CSS Reset since changing the background in body didn't work.
Edit: Actually, I still haven't found the problem regarding that, when I add the reset.css the background gets white, when I remove it returns to normal. Yet Chrome inspector says that the background is the normal one. Btw, this is getting off topic. :p
Edit 2: The culprit was the doctype. Somehow it made the html style in the css-reset render after the body style in my stylesheet. Maybe I should open a question regarding this.
Doctype: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
Quite often you'll find people styling the HTML element since it does have an affect on the way the page is rendered.
The most notable style you're likely to see is
html,body{
min-height:101%;
}
This is used to ensure that the scroll bars in browsers like Firefox, always show on the page. This stops the page shifting left and right when changing between long and short pages.
The reason we're allowed to style the html element is because it is a DOM element like any other. All DOM elements can be styled to be something they are not, like a container. Take this example:
<html><body>This is my page.</body></html>
Using CSS to limit the body to 80% width, setting borders on the body and giving the html a different background color (creating an "off page" effect) would be perfectly acceptable, keeping the semantics of the markup intact without resorting to div clutter.
Here's a technique I discovered for centering containers (vertically and horizontally) on the screen without using tons of divs or tables, or even having to know the size of the centered container.
html {
display:table;
width:100%;
height:100%;
}
body {
display:table-cell;
vertical-align:middle;
}
body > div {
# "shrink wraps" the div so you don't have to specify a width.
# there's probably a better way to do precisely that, but this works.
display:table;
margin:0 auto; # center the div
}
You can style the html element (heck you can head, title { display: block; } if you like), but browser support is a bit weak (IIRC, Internet Explorer <8 has issues).
Offhand, I would say: <html> is not a visible element per se, and it contains sections for semantic (e.g. <head>) and presentation data (<body>).
On the other hand, <body> is a block for visible elements, so it can be given a presentation style.
But people do apply styles to the <html> element for a couple cases: (a) because all of its child elements will inherit that style, and (b) in special cases like the scrollbar trick that Jamie Dixon mentioned.
I don't believe you can, but styling <body> should work for you
html is the containing element for the whole document, it contains the <body> which is what is rendered by the browser and <head> which contains meta information on the page/document you are viewing. It has actually no use to be able to style the html element since it isn't rendered by the browser.
It can however be used to build you css selectors with (html div.dataView { color: red } for example)
Is there an "invisible" tag in HTML (4) that I can use to make CSS distinctions
tag.myclass tag.mysubclass h1 { }
without having any visual impact on the HTML rendered?
My background is that I have areas in a form that belong to different groups. As I am opening those in lightboxes (long story involving DOM operations and such, not really important) I don't want to rely on the usual div class=x or span class=y to style the subsequent elements, as I would have to reset margins here, paddings there, and so on.
A layout-neutral wrapping tag would be just what I need in such situations.
No, there is not.
(And that's because such an element wouldn't really fit into the rest of HTML. The only reason DIV and SPAN affect the surrounding area is because they're block and inline elements, respectively. What would an 'invisible' element be? If you need something that's completely independent, absolutely (or relatively) position it and give it a higher z-index.)
If you want to group elements use a div or a span tag as a wrapper element. Apply your id or class to this, and style it accordingly.
EDIT
There isn't an 'invisible' tag - but margins and padding can be easily reset 'margin: 0; padding: 0;'
While all browsers give default styling to many HTML tags, at it's core HTML only describes data, it doesn't format it.
What you're probably looking for is a DIV tag, because no browser gives any default styling to that tag.
I think you want a <fieldset>.
I'd say a span tag is as neutral as they come. I don't think there's any browser that applies a margin nor a padding and it just wraps around it's contents.
I suspect you can use <object> tag without usual attributes for that purpose, but I haven't tested it thoroughly yet. It's even in HTML5 (unlike FONT tag).
The right answer is use a div tag and define a class for it. Here is an example:
<h2 style="font-size: 14px">Project 1 - Project 2
<div class="username">{% if request.user.is_authenticated%} Welcome {{request.user.username}} {% endif %}</div>
</h2>
then in your css file you can have a class like this:
.username {
color:white;
float:right;
padding-right: 100px;
}
voila!! It all belongs to h2 tag but the user name has a different css applied.
You can add display: none; to it. That won't display it (obviously).
I'd like to change this:
<a href='foo'>
<div> Moo </div>
</a>
to be standards compliant (you're not supposed to have block elements in inline elements). Wiring javascript to the divs just for navigation seems like a hack and degrades accessibility.. In this case, my requirements are for 2 sets of borders on my fixed-dimension links, so the above non-compliant code works perfectly after applying styles.
Also, is "a { display:block; }" a legal way to circumvent the validation?
Why not use a <span> rather than a <div> and set display:block on both elements?
Additionally, to answer your latter question: I don't believe adding display:block; to your anchor will make it pass validation. The validator checks to see if you're following (X)HTML rules, not how to present the page to the user.
You may want to consider putting the div outside the a if it is only for display purposes, unless it's important that the outer border be clickable. Either this:
<div class="dbl_border_links">Blah text</div>
or this:
<a class="dbl_border_links" href="blah"><span>Blah text</span></a>
will work and you can use something like this:
<style>
.dbl_border_links, .dbl_border_links>* {
display: block;
border: 1px solid;
padding: 1px;
}
.dbl_border_links {
border-color: red;
}
.dbl_border_links > * {
border-color: blue;
}
</style>
to specify the styles. Personally I'd go with the div containing the a but either approach works.
I normally consider the <a > tag to be a special case for this purpose. You ought to be able to apply that to just about anything- it is after kind of the whole point of hypertext (<tr > comes to mind a good example). But if you have to pass a validator somewhere I understand.
Could you use a javascript onclick handler for the div, and eliminate the anchor entirely?
Firstly, there is certainly nothing wrong with giving an anchor display:block; I'd say it's one of the more common things people do with CSS and is perfectly standards compliant. Secondly, there are a number of ways to achieve a double border on an HTML element. For one thing, check out the "outline" property:
http://webdesign.about.com/od/advancedcss/a/outline_style.htm
Admittedly, this will only work in the more modern browsers but should degrade gracefully as the outline doesn't take up any space in the page. If the contents of the link is to be an image you can simply give the <a> a little padding and a background colour as well as a normal border (in another colour) to create the impression of a double border. Or give the image a border of its own. Of course you can also do something along the lines of your original idea, though nesting your HTML the other way around, and simply assigning a different border to each element. Or you can use an inline element inside the link (like a <span> or an <em> or something) which you also set to display:block; (yes, this is also valid!). Happy coding!
If I understand correctly your intentions, you should place, as already mentioned, the div outside the anchor, and, to get the same presentation, make the anchor width:100%;height:100%. Cross Browser milage may vary.
Also, you could dump the div altogether and give the anchor display:block;
What are you exactly trying to do?