Reduced test case here.
I'm trying to understand why this occurs.
If I have an <a> within an <h2> and set a line height on either the <body> or <h2> the link height is greater than the <h2>.
[Update to clarify] The issue is that .title a has a computed height of 58px, whereas its parent h2.title has a computed height of 50px. I expected them both to have the same computed height. [/update]
I've given them both bottom borders to better illustrate the problem.
[Update 2] I've read over the line-height spec to try and understand this.
From my reading of the spec it seems like an inline element a within a block-level element h2 ought to inherit the parent line-height. I've edited my example here with a larger line-height on the h2. Giving the a a display of inline-block obviously makes it fit, but it still doesn't line through as well as removing line-height altogether (thus using browser default line-height of 1.2).
This is probably not a problem as such, I'd just like to understand the behavior.
[Update 3] I've realised that if I change the line-height of the a to be greater than the h2 the overall height of the h2 box (pink in example above) does increase, so the a is inheriting the line-height from the h2. The confusing thing is that the link height (clickable area) and border-bottom position don't change, whereas the border-bottom on the h2 moves with the line-height.
I don't see your problem. In the link you provide there is absolutely nothing strange. You have a link in a h2. So the font-size of the link gets the font-size of h2. But the a is nowhere bigger than the h2.
It isn't an issue?
However add display:block; to your anchor and it will act more like you expect
you have a h2 containing a link.
the h2 and the link have a line height of 1 (as inherited) but the link has a explicit font size of 3em.
that means, the font size is bigger as the container, which might lead to different results in different browsers.
in Firefox (version 13) the result is, that you have an overflow to the top and the bottom of the parent container (h2).
have you tried removing the margins of the <H3> ? it has default margin to 0.5em in most browsers.
If this was the problem you can read about Reset CSS.
Edit:
you have 2 types of containers, a floted block element with strict fixed height;
and a inline witch has auto hate .. and default margins and spacings (imagin a link as part of a paragraph...).
To get the expected result you can add display:inline-block on the <a>.
So they both will be treated as boxes with fixed height.
http://dabblet.com/gist/5219955
Related
I have a row setup like so:
<div class="row">
<div class="small-12 small-push-12 large-6 columns">
<!-- Content -->
</div>
<div class="small-12 small-pull-12 large-6 columns">
<!-- Content -->
</div>
</div>
Basically, I want the second column to be pulled before the first column when the screen is small, but keep it at proper order for large screens.
What am I doing wrong here? The document reflows like it always does.
Also, I do realize I can just reverse the order in the HTML itself and it'll work, but just curious if it's possible to make it work this way.
Your question prompted me to look at Foundation’s SCSS source code to see how the grid was implemented since like you I was having trouble getting my columns to shift as I wanted. In the time spent finding an answer I’ve now forgotten what I’d needed to find out originally but having gained insight as to how the grid works I know it will now be much easier to use and I’ll feel more confident that my work is correct. I’ll try to provide some of that insight here.
The simple answer to your question is, No, you can’t make Foundation swap a block of columns in the way you’ve done it. [I’ll call them columns as opposed to grid columns that refer to Foundation’s (usually 12) base columns.] Assuming it might have worked I’d say that the code you wrote would be correct. The actual reason it fails to work is because *there are no 12 column push or pull classes defined in Foundation for small, medium, large or any media size range." Thus, when the media screen size is "small" (in your case) the push and pull classes are silently ignored by CSS and you end up with two columns on two rows in the original order.
The general rule is that you can’t push or pull columns from one row to another; you can only move them along the same row. After seeing that I reread your question which began, "I have a row setup like so…" But that’s not true since the intention is to produce two rows. That one can create multiple rows with one column(s) definition is, I think, just a side effect of how CSS floats work.
Here’s what happens (excuse me for anthropomorphizing the CSS attributes…it's just easier to talk about them as "doing something to something" and often seems to be the best way to clearly understand what's happening):
For every column you specify, it’s width is determined using the current grid column width (plus some "gutter" for spacing) multiplied by the specified number of grid columns from the class name used (large-6, small-2, etc.). Since they have been given the float attribute they are then lined up one against the next starting at the beginning of the row. If there is not enough room on one row to display all the columns the line of columns is split and continues on the "line" below, and so on; those that don't fit are moved to the next row (and so on). Without other classes specified each column will be displayed in this initial position. This is how multiple rows can be formed from one column(s) definition.
When you add push and pull classes the CSS right and left attributes are added to those described above. The offset determined by the specified push or pull class is used to calculate the relative shift which is used to reorder columns if necessary. But the left and right CSS attributes know nothing about where these column-blocks have come from or that there is any row but the one they work on. So each column is moved along the line where it was initially placed and if the amount of shift moves the column outside of the row boundary it will be placed (or partially placed) to the left or right of the row (and possibly out of sight). That’s the reason that your proposed process won't work in general though in your case, as mentioned above, you used a class that wasn't defined (small-push-12) and got a different effect. If you play around a bit with the lower numbered push and pull classes (1 through 11) you can see more clearly how the columns are pushed part way off a row. (the way it is currently done by Foundation, at least) and why I now think (since at first I thought it might be possible myself) that being able to create multiple rows in the base case is a beneficial "side effect" of how CSS happens to work.
For anyone wanting to improve their CSS understanding or who uses Foundation, I highly recommend taking some time to work through one or more of the features that Zurb has implemented in the framework. I find that the SCSS definitions are well designed and cleanly coded (though perhaps not to everyone’s liking since, IMHO, CSS coding opinions seem to be as inflammatory as Mac/Windows opinions and often evoke the same fervor when expressed).
Found the solution in a separate thread! Start with the order you want in the source for mobile, then use the push/pull classes to bend it around for the LARGER sizes. In other words, approach it from the opposite end.
Change order for Foundation small-12 column
I have an XSLFO document with a couple of block elements that have page-break-inside="avoid". Also there is a title-Element before each block-element with keep-with-next.within-page="always".
So basically I have paragraphs with a title and title and paragraph should always be on the same page and there shouldn't be a page-break inside the paragraphs.
The problem is that there are some blocks that have too much content for one page. If the content only overflows the region-body but not the entire page, no page-break occurs, so the block is still on one page.
However, there are blocks where the text overflows the entire page and in that case, there is a page-break-before. One such block element with too much content should be on the first page of the document. However, there is a page-break and it is on the second page of the document.
So in essence, my problem is that there should be no page-breaks within the block-elements (the pargraphs), title and paragraph should always be on the same page AND there should be no page-break before the very first block-element, even if it overflows the entire page. The content should always start on the first page and there should be no empty pages at all.
Thanks for your help and suggestions!
The spec says:
Keep conditions are imposed by the "within-page", "within-column", and "within-line" components of the "keep-with-previous", "keep-with-next", and "keep-together" properties. The refined value of each component specifies the strength of the keep condition imposed, with higher numbers being stronger than lower numbers and the value always being stronger than all numeric values.
Have you tried different values? Maybe you could change page-break-inside="avoid" into keep-together="<your value here>" to use tuned values.
Edit: See spec http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#keepbreak
My requirement is to produce, essentially, a page WITHIN a page. The xsl defines a page 1/3 the size of an A4 sheet, but up to 3 of them must print on the sheet. The page is a standard header/body/footer, with a 'Page X of Y' on it and of course it is simple. But if there are 4 of these "pages", only 2 pages should be printed, 3 on the first and 1 on the second. But 4 pages are printed, because the output PDF "tells" the printer that is a complete sheet. So what I want to do is either:
code the fo so it does not page break after it finished a page (something like page-break-after="avoid" but at the page sequence level)
OR
generate a page sequence within a page sequence, the outer one being defined as A4 size, the inner 1/3 of that.
I've tried the 2nd directly in a simple way, i.e.,
<fo:page-sequence master-reference="A4">
<fo:page-sequence master-reference="one-third_A4">
...
</fo:page-sequence>
</fo:page-sequence>
..and the processor definitely does NOT like it.
Are there any instructions I can apply that could do either of these? I looked in places like schemacentral and w3schools.com and cannot find anything.
Not sure if I understood you needs (a drawing would help), but can't you simply put your content into a series of fo:block-container elements with specified height? They would come out stacked vertically.
If you need more complex geometry, check out flow-maps feature of XSL 1.1. Three body regions per page connected sequentially in a <fo:flow-target-list>, and a single fo:flow providing content for them.
Having fo:page-sequence within another fo:page-sequence is not valid according to the spec (what would a page number mean then?), and every fo:page-sequence starts a new physical page by definition.
fo:page-sequence-wrapper won't help you on sub-page level either.
I am having a lot of difficulty using the CSS 3 columns style. I'm using Firefox 3.6 which should support the -moz-column layout.
I have a list of items and I'm trying to render them in 2 columns, top to bottom. To assist my internal sorting algorithm, the very first list item is a sub list.
my css uses this
.container{
-moz-column-width:635; //slightly wider than the list item we're displaying
-moz-column-rule:1px solid;
}
.sub_list{
width:50%;
display:list-item;
}
.item{
overflow:hidden;
padding:0;
margin:0;
display:list-item;
width:634px;
}
Unfortunately my list is displaying as a single column list or a multi column layout where each <li> is marked float:left; but which isn't sufficient since it orders thusly:
1 2
3 4
5 6
This isn't what I need, and it looks absolutely hideous because list item 1 is itself a list.
The examples I have found all seem to order the list items vertically and they don't use any additional tags:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roc/archives/2005/03/gecko_18_for_we.html and/or
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/CSS_Reference/Mozilla_Extensions .
Can anybody tell me what I'm doing wrong? Maybe I'm failing to understand the layout engine properly.
It's been requested that I officially "answer" this question so I'm moving my answer from the comment to an answer.
After nearly a full day of research and tinkering I finally tinkered my way to the answer about five minutes after posting the question.
I removed all display/position related styles for .item. Whether or not any of them are actually compatible with Column format I don't know. You'll have to experiement with it or ask someone more knowledgable.
I gave .container a fixed height.
I'm managing to generate a PDF with one line-chart from google-chart, but the quality of the generated columns titles doesn't fit our needs, so I want to generate by myself.
This task should be done using [fo:table] but I'm not able to positionate succesfully the titles (widths and margins/paddings).
In sum up, I want to put the titles using [fo:block] setting the width attribute plus a negative margin (i.e. width="1.5cm" margin-top="-2em"), but the width doesn't take effect.
Do you know how to do it?
Thanks.
The "width" property doesn't apply to fo:block (see http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#fo_block). If you want to redefine the width, you need to use an fo:block-container (http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#fo_block-container) or another element that generates a so-called reference area. It's a bit difficult to understand what exactly your expected layout is. Maybe you can also experiment with using "start-indent" and "end-indent" properties to indirectly influence the actual width of an fo:block. HTH
Finally I have not been able to do that, because [fo:inline] tries to gather all the available space.
One trick is to put margins (left or right) to the 90% or more to fill that gap, but I then have no clue the previous [fo:inline] text was rendered in one, two or more lines.
The only way I found to generate the column's titles is using [fo:table] plus adding margins (left & right) to each cell.
PS: I use FOP-0.95
For FOP you may use tables to set width instead of applying it directly on block.