Any thoughts? The first list item is being squished, but only by IE. All of the other browsers are happy.
http://dev.torontofamilytherapist.com/services/
Robbert has the correct answer but no reason. The reason why this is happening because the right two images are bigger than the container. The first one is not. Therefore it hits the width:auto and thus it is shrunk to the dimensions of the image.
Rather than changing the css, you can replace it with an image of the correct dimensions (370x264).
I looked at your code in the IE Console. When I removed the checkbox next to width:auto; in bootstrap.css, the image expanded correctly. While I'm not sure why this fixed the issue, it does fix it.
You'll want to override the CSS statement elsewhere.
.featured-thumbnail img { width: 100% important!; }
If the image has smaller width than it's parent you need to put width: 100%; in order for image to cover entire container, otherwise width: auto; limits it to image actual size.
Related
My situation is the following: I have page that shows an image but sometimes it's too small, so I need to get the it bigger. I used CSS Transform to do that and works fine.
The problem is that the parent DIV's size does not increase, and there is space in the page for it to do so!
Using overflow on the parent does not help me because it crops the image or add a scroll bar. I need it to grow.
So, I managed to replicate a little what I am talking about here: http://jsfiddle.net/viniciuspaiva/7jJXQ/
When you click in the "Zoom" button, I want the div to grow and the pager below to get down. But I also want the page to load as it is, with the pager on top. Hope it's clear.
As you can see, I use bootstrap on my page. And the zoom button just adds a class to the image:
javascript:var img = $('img.center'); img.addClass('zoom');
Thanks!
Try doing it the other way. Have the image fit to the div, and resize the div instead.
Add this style to the image (assuming .myimg is the class).
.myimg {
display: block;
width: 100%;
}
Try placing this inside of your current div at the end of it before you close your current div. It will force the div to expand to contents.
<div style="clear: both;"></div>
So your div opens, the contents inside, then add the code above, then close the div.
Here's an example of Joseph the Dreamer's implementation. Check it out here. It only relies on setting display: block; and width: 100%;.
I'm kinda stuck here and I'm looking for some ideas. I have a breadcrumb system which uses :before and :after tags for the arrows.
The maximum width for all the breadcrumbs put together is 735px as that is the size of the container element.
Now; I need to restrict the length of each breadcrumb to stop them overflowing and to ensure that they all stay on one line. To do this, I will need to set a maximum width on the breadcrumb. However the max-width will depend on the number of breadcrumbs which are currently visible.
I know that the easiest way would be to count the number of breadcrumbs present and set a fixed position by dividing the container width by the number of breadcrumbs, but this is not what I want - It would mean that breadcrumbs with a shorter title have a large gap, like below.
So I need to specify a max-width, but the max-width will depend on the width of the other breadcrumbs.
For example, if all the breadcrumbs have a fairly long title, the max-width will need to be small enough to allow all breadcrumbs to fit in the container.
But if, say, five of the breadcrumbs have very short titles (ie 4 characters) and the fifth one has a longer title, I would want the max-width to allow all the text on the last breadcrumb to be displayed, but still ensuring that the breadcrumbs still fit inside the container.
Sorry if this is too confusing. Here's a jsFiddle of my breadcrumbs so you can understand how they're structured. If you need any more information please let me know.
http://jsfiddle.net/5CLYt/
The second example in the jsFiddle shows how the max-width needs to be dependant on the width of the other breadcrumbs, and not just the number of the breadcrumbs displayed.
Beside the answer of #JAYBEkster, you could consider using flexbox.
Here is a great resource: http://css-tricks.com/snippets/css/a-guide-to-flexbox/
I've updated your fidle: http://jsfiddle.net/NicoO/5CLYt/1/
/*
COPIED FROM: http://css-tricks.com/snippets/css/a-guide-to-flexbox/
*/
#container {
display: flex;
justify-content: space-around;
list-style: none outside none;
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
I know this is not what you want, since the space between the items is growing and not the items it self. But maybe it' the right direction.
Maybe keep this question updated.
Update 2: flexbox is awesome.
It works with firefox: http://jsfiddle.net/NicoO/5CLYt/3/
All you needed to do was:
.breadcrumbButton
{
flex: 1 1 auto;
}
You should add display:table for your container; add display:table-cell for each child and remove floating;
I am working on a memory matching game. Right now, when the user clicks on two identical images, they are removed. This part of the game works fine. When the images are removed, I want the other images to stay in place. However, they are shifting towards each other and not leaving space.
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/kevinferri/bCP4G/
For example, click on the two flowers in the middle column. You will see that the the two outer columns will shift towards each other and fill that empty space. How can I change it so the images will stay in place after others are removed?
You probably don't want to be .remove()-ing elements if you want to the DOM to remember their original layout spacing and sizes. You want to just chuck those elements into hidden visibility so that they're hidden, but they maintain their size and position.
$(element).css('visibility', 'hidden');
That's visibility:hidden in CSS. Do take note of the difference between that and .show() / .hide() or even CSS display:none.
You'll want to give your tds some fixed sizes:
<style>
#playCards td { width: 200px; height: 200px; margin: 0; padding: 0 }
</style>
I'm working on a web app where I have an image, and, for lack of a better word, a "view" of that image which is a box limiting what you can see to whatever part of the image is inside the box. The view can be adjusted by dragging the edges around, and the image is stays. However, I also want to be able to drag both the view and the image around together.
The best analogy I can think of is the Snipping Tool in Windows that you use to capture a portion of your screen.
I've tried a div with a background image, but that always resizes the image to fit the div. Right now I'm trying to have a div that contains an img, and setting the div to have overflow:hidden, but that makes the image stick to the upper left corner of the div.
Help? Thanks in advance!
Sounds like you want something that masks the image and only shows a segment.
Assuming a structure like.
<div class="img-mask">
<img>
</div>
You can set the styles of the mask to be overflow hidden with a width and a height (this creates the mask). Then position the image relatively, left and top till it's where you want it to be.
.img-mask {
overflow: hidden;
height: 200px;
width: 200px;
}
.img-mask img {
position: relative;
top: -25%;
left: -25%;
}
This should center the image to the mask.
I think there's a CSS property cut out for exactly this task: the clip attribute.
Here's the W3schools tutorial: http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/pr_pos_clip.asp. Click the Try it Yourself button to get a hands-on idea.
With this the CSS property applies only on the image and you do not need an additional masking div.
I have a flex component like this:
<s:Application xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"
...
width="100%"
height="100%"
creationComplete="init()">
.......
<components:NavigationBar id="nagivationBar"
left="0" bottom="0" />
This is supposed to show at the bottom left of the screen considering that parent container fills the screen.
The behaviour I just described shows perfectly with Safari
with Chrome it shows correctly if the download bar beneath is not visible but as soon as the download bar has something it covers the bottom part of it.
and FireFox seems to always hide like 50 pixels or so from the bottom of the screen.
It seems like every browser renders the 100% height in its own way.
What is your recommended best way to overcome this? I can add a 100 pixel margin at the bottom but it's not something I want to do in this application.
Try something like this in the <head></head> section of the HTML page that loads your Flex Application:
<style type="text/css">
html, body{
width: 100%; /* make the body expand to fill the visible window */
height: 100%;
padding: 0 0 0 0;
margin: 0 0 0 0;
overflow: hidden;
}
</style>
Not sure it will help in your case but it's easy to try.
You could wrap the output in a containing <div>, then using YUI's getClientRegion, and a resize event for good measure, set the containing div's CSS height property to the value which YUI has determined the available viewport vertical space.
Sorry the solution is an outside-of-Flex one, but it'll work.
Edit: I meant 'getViewportHeight()' not 'getClientRegion()', sorry, check out the APi docs though, there's plenty of goodies in there for this sort of stuff.
Flex is just a flash component in a web page. Its size depends of what is outside of flex. I don't think you'll get a proper answer unless you post HTML/JS code surrounding flex app.
PS. From my experience working with browser height may be very troublesome.
this normally happens when you have one or more positioning elements in a page. Check your code to see if you have used the position element anywhere else in your code, if so are they different, i.e one relative and the other absolute, if so this could be your problem, its reccomended that they are all the same, ie all relative