I am working on a js player and the seek bar doesnt want to play nice. You can see two on pageload, they both work properly. Now click on either first or second div with the play img on it and a bar will appear. When you click there the bar is not precise. Its several pixels off.
this.offsetLeft is giving me 0 instead of 10 which breaks this. How do i fix it?
-edit- i still dont understand why but i decided to look again a min ago and deleted random css i pasted in. i deleted this single line and it worked. I am not sure what that block does but i know without that line it currently looks the same. player is not done yet so maybe i'll need this and revisit the question
position:relative;
The position:relative style is often used to make the element the "origin" for absolutely-positioned child elements. In other words, child elements with position:absolute calculate their positions from the relative parent's position. (instead of the window's) This way child elements follow the parent wherever it is placed.
Relative positioning also lets you use 'left', and 'top' to adjust the position of the element from its normally position.
The style can also be used to fix positioning and scrolling bugs in Internet Explorer.
It maybe too late for this issue but my experience can be useful here.
I had the same problem, i was getting 0, when i called getOffsetLeft() method.
you must add your widgets into container first and then call getOffsetLeft() method.
Related
I spend couple of hours to try to get width of my div container. I read many questions and answers but none of them seem to work in my case - I always got 0. Finally I found that I can get it through scrollWidth property which wasn't even mentioned in this question and similar.
Now I have what I wanted by I still have no idea how this works.
Why all the other methods fail? Why this is named scrollWidth? I don't want to scroll anything - it's so confusing. Can I get the size of an element before I append it to a document - even scrollWidth don't work in that case. Is there any model I should follow to always get what I see on the screen? I can't see any patterns right now, I write someting, see something different on the screen, and get something even more different in the output. Every time I want to do someting it seem to be 10 different methods I can use but usually only one or two work because it depends on which methods I used earlier. When i work with 2d graphics I used to have x,y,width and height but in html I allways got those smarty CSS which seem to know better what I want to do. Sorry if this sound a little officious but I'm a little annoyed when i need to spend so much time on a trivial task like this. I use to draw graphic on canvas and it was much simpler but now I want to make a simple website so it's probably not a good idea to build it this way.
Here is my example
I understand that i get 0 size becouse those properties refer to element independently of its children and my container has 0,0 size, right? I read that if I set display: inline-block; style it will adapt size to match its children automatically - why this in not working?
The container element in fact has no width. This is why you are getting widths of zero. You can see this if you use dev tools element inspector.
The reason for it being that the container element is absolutely positioned and has no set width. Your child elements are also position: absolute and therefore they will not force the container element to 'grow' to their size.
To get the visible width of the menu, instead you could total up the widths of all the child elements (the first-level menu items). This is probably the best approach to use for the way you currently have things set up. Otherwise, I would suggest completely changing your approach with the html elements you are using, to the CSS properties you are using to position elements where it would not be required to use position: absolute.
I would advise you to open up your dev tools element inspector and start looking at how things react when you change the position from 'absolute' to 'relative'.
Understanding how to position elements and how widths/heights are affected using CSS will save you a lot of headaches - like the one you are having now :)
document.getElementById("mydiv").offsetWidth
This will return the width, including padding.
I'm working on this website right now http://antoniobrandao.com/v4
All objects are placed in absolute positions. Unfortunately this doesn't enable vertical scrolling.
I've read that using position:static in a parent element (in my case, the DIV sections-wrapper ) would do the trick, and yes a scrollbar appears, but the contents seem visually destroyed when I attempt to scroll after setting position: fixed to my sections-wrapper DIV.
I'm new to HTML5 so if anyone could give me a hint I would be most thankful!
thanks
I found out the answer to my own question.
The solution was to manually (via JavaScript) set the height of my "sections-wrapper" and "background" to match the height of the contents of the sections within the "sections-wrapper".
This is because the "sections-wrapper" doesn't know automagically how tall is the stuff within itself, so we must tell it ourselves. The downside is that we must always be updating this values when the contents change height within the wrapper. Not too bad.
so if the stuff within my wrapper is eg. 1200px:
$('.background').css('height', '1200px');
$('#sections-wrapper').css('height', '1200px');
As far as I can make out, the only way to bring something to the front is to delete/append, or just append. However, this is so inefficient that I thought I'd just check here first.
I've got a complex set of objects which pop up on a mouseover (paths and text). I initially thought I'd handle this by creating one static instance of the popup, and hiding it. Whenever it's needed, I simply translate it and make it visible.
I thought this worked, but it turns out that it's transparent - anything which is created dynamically in a script appears on top of it. Is there any way to make this work? The alternative is to create it from scratch on every mouseover, and then to delete it on mouseout, which just feels wrong.
Thanks -
Al
You could give it an enormous z-index and toggle the visibility if it is positioned absolutely (or fixed) or the display if it is static. Least amount of redrawing is to position it absolutely or fixed, and toggle visibility between hidden and visible.
A requirement for a current project of mine involves "highlighting" an HTML element in the context of a page. That is, I need to provide some sort of visual effect that decreases the brightness of the surrounding page while leaving the element at full brightness.
To achieve this, I'm trying the following approach:
Determining the highest z-index value of any element on the page (using JavaScript).
Creating an element to function as a "backdrop" on top of the page. This is just a <div> with a translucent gray background image, sized to 100% of the width and height of the <body> element, with position: fixed. I set its z-index to 1 greater than the highest z-index I've found on the page, with the intent that it will overlay every other element on the page.
Change the z-index of the "highlighted" element to 1 greater than the backdrop. The intent is to allow it to sit on top of the backdrop, which in turn sits on top of the rest of the page.
I got it working on a quick test page:
http://troy.onespot.com/static/stack_overflow/z_index_test.html
but when I tried to set it up on a few actual Web pages, it didn't work in all cases. For example:
http://troy.onespot.com/static/stack_overflow/z_index.html
Here, I've inserted two "dummy" elements on a copy of a Jacksonville.com article page, both with a class of test (if you're looking at the page source, they're at lines 169 & 859).
I also added some JavaScript (using jQuery) at the very end of the page that functions as I've described above.
The first <div class="test"> does function as I'd expect it to. However, the second one does not - it seems to still be stuck beneath the "backdrop" element, despite having a higher z-index.
I think this may have something to do with stacking contexts, but after reading through the relevant W3C docs (http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#z-index & http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/zindex.html), I still can't fathom why this is happening. I'd appreciate anyone more familiar with z-index and stacking order than I to take a look at my examples and let me know if anything looks suspicious.
Please note that I've only tested these examples in Firefox v3.6.
Thanks very much for any help!
The problem is that the second test div is inside a bunch of other HTML elements, one of which must be creating a new stacking context (it may be the #wl-wrapper-tier-1 div). Basically, a new stacking context is created whenever an element is positioned and has a z-index other than auto, see this MDC article for more info on stacking contexts.
Ultimately this means you can't achieve your desired effect reliably with this method. I think you're probably better off composing 4 divs to surround the target element.
If the element that you're highlighting is inside a different element (stacking context) with a z-index lower than the backdrop, it will not appear higher than the backdrop, since the element's z-index only controls stacking order within that parent.
The only good solution is to clone the highlighted element and add the clone to the <body> tag.
Beware of inherited CSS styles, which would be lost.
After googling around and finding a lot of ie bugs I still did not find a description of the problem I have.
The initial situation is a standard one. We have a tooltip which is actually a hidden div that will be displayed on mouseover at a given location. The div is hidden with display:none and contains a table with the content. We tried different libraries for showing the div (scriptaculous and jQuery Cluetip) but the effect is the same.
The problem:
Everything is fine as long as the contents fits the width of my window. But when I resize it until the horizontal scrollbar is activated the content of the hidden div will be shown at the end of the page when the tooltip is activated.
This is really strange as it happens only under these premises. When more than one tooltip is involved the browser might even crash (and under Vista takes the whole system with him duh).
I know it's a bit complicated to explain but I hope that someone at least had heard of that bug and can point me into the right direction.
Setting the width css property to "auto" (defined in the W3C standard) in IE will cause the <div> element to take up the entire space allotted to it. If the <body> element does not have a width applied, then this can result in a page miles and miles wide. This often crashes the browser, depending on the operating system. The best option is to just set it to null instead.
(This is based on actual experience coding for IE6 and may not necessarily apply to IE7+).
Another thing to keep in mind is that most browsers do what's called "lazy rendering" which means that if an element is hidden on the page, it won't render it. It won't even acknowledge its existence as a potentially visible object until it is unhidden. This means having no idea how big that object is going to be until you reveal it. This can cause problems if you're trying to figure out how big something will be once you make it visible. Basically the only way around it is to unhide it, read its size, re-hide it, then proceed.
The way that I did my tool tip is to use visibility hidden and visible. Once the mouse is off, I set the x and y to 0 to move the tooltip out of the viewing space.
This only works if the position is set to absolute.
Edit: How did you position the tooltip when showing it:
I positioned the tooltip by changing the css values of "top" and "left".
box.css("left, e.pageX+1);
box.css("top", e.pageY+1);
Where 'e' is my event variable from:
mousemove(function(e){});