I am working on an existing JSF Primefaces 8 project with previous developers long gone and I have in general become reasonably competent over the last year or so, but the one thing that still escapes me is styling. I believe the project is using something like sass.
I have a couple of p:calendar elements in readOnly mode (no free form date entry) that make up a 'from date' & 'to date' combination. I am restricting them with each other via minDate & maxDate to ensure that 'to date' is greater/equal than 'from date'.
So far so good and while it does work I would like to make it visually clearer that certain dates are not available. As in 'gray out' the unavailable dates. Unfortunately it does not render like that, the unavailable dates have the same text color & background as the valid ones.
When I inspect the unavailable ones I get this
<td class=" ui-datepicker-unselectable ui-state-disabled "><span class="ui-state-default">23</span></td>
so I think I need to overwrite the text color for this class, right? But how do I go on about that?
I found the following in src/resources/sass/_forms.scss
.ui-datepicker-calendar {
font-size: 13px;
margin: 8px 0 0 0;
padding: 8px;
td {
padding: 2px;
a {
color: $text-color-primary;
text-align: center;
#include border-radius-all($border-radius);
}
&.ui-datepicker-today a {
background-color: $panel-background-color-darkest;
}
a.ui-state-active {
background-color: $highlight-primary-color;
color: $text-color-white;
}
}
}
I do realize I need to learn the principle here in the very near future but any quick help would be appreciated all the same.
Thanks for your time
I got to the bottom of it.
I needed to tweak the datepicker styles in one of my SASS (.scss) files and added to '.ui-datepicker-calendar {}' the following section:
.ui-datepicker-unselectable .ui-state-default {
color: $color-grey-lighten-3;
}
This link helped me greatly: https://www.hongkiat.com/blog/jquery-ui-datepicker/
Related
I am using react-virtualized WindowScroller with CellMeasurer to scroll through a 100 sample records and by itself, it works great.
Now, when I place this component in a content pane with a frozen header and footer (using flex) above and below it, react-virtualized does not bring in additional data beyond the first page.
The structure of my container page is the same as the create-react-app template:
<div className="App">
<div className="App-header" />
<div className="App-intro" />
<div className="App-footer" />
</div>
and here is the CSS I use to freeze the header and footer:
html, body, #root {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
overflow: hidden;
}
.App {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
}
.App-header, .App-footer {
flex-shrink: 0;
}
.App-intro {
flex-grow: 1;
overflow-y: auto;
}
FWIW, the official WindowScroller example accomplishes a frozen header using flex, but try as I might, I am not able to replicate it on my end.
I am at my wit's end after spending a whole entire day on this. I would really really appreciate any pointers to get this flex layout going with a functional window-scroller.
In the CodeSandbox you linked to (codesandbox.io/s/52j0vv936p)- window "scroll" events aren't reaching WindowScroller. That's because the window isn't actually what's scrollable, rather it's the middle "body" part. If that's what you want, you don't need to use WindowScroller at all and should remove it.
The only thing left that's broken is that your AutoSizer isn't getting a valid height because one of its parent <div>s doesn't have a correct height. For Stack Overflow convenience, here's the relevant bit:
Why is my AutoSizer setting a height of 0?
AutoSizer expands to fill its parent but it will not stretch the parent. This is done to prevent problems with flexbox layouts. If AutoSizer is reporting a height (or width) of 0- then it's likely that the parent element (or one of its parents) has a height of 0. One easy way to test this is to add a style property (eg background-color: red;) to the parent to ensure that it is the correct size. (eg You may need to add height: 100% or flex: 1 to the parent.)
Here is a diff to your sandbox that shows what I'm talking about and here is a fixed Code Sandbox demo.
I've been trying Masonry but can't get it to work exactly as I wanted. The elements I use vary in width and height, but all fit in a grid (4 different sizes, all multiple of smallest+margins). I've also calculated a distribution of elements (7 of the smallest, 4 of all the others) that can fit precisely.
However it's rare that masonry manages to fit them neatly, sometimes there's one lurking at the bottom, sometimes several are misplaced. It's always so that in one view I can see what items need to be moved for it to fit.
Is there a way to make masonry more aggressive in moving elements? Or have it go over two times to make sure there are no empty spaces?
You should probably look at masonry's "big brother" Isotope here. Mind you, if you have elements that are sorted in a certain order or fixed in a certain order - and that are wider than a single column width - they can "block" a column at narrow browser widths.
EDIT Maybe this fiddle explains it a bit better. If you look at that one and - while observing the numbers in the divs - you see that the next masonry element up (the red element 5) can not possibly fit in the white square as it must come after element 4; so where it must end up means, that, with only three rows fitting, one gets a white gap. Maybe you can use Isotope's shuffle and/or reLayout methods and sacrifice ordering your elements in a strict order? Best would be a jsfiddle with your issue.
<article>
<div class="tile blue"><p>1</p></div>
<div class="tile black"><p>2</p></div>
<div class="tile tall yellow"><p>3</p></div>
<div class="tile grey"><p>4</p></div>
<div class="tile wide red"><p>5</p></div>
<div class="tile green"><p>6</p></div>
<div class="tile grey"><p>7</p></div>
<div class="tile blue"><p>8</p></div>
<div class="tile green"><p>9</p></div>
</article>
$('article').isotope({
itemSelector : '.tile',
masonry: {
columnWidth: 100
}
});
article .tile {
display: block;
float: left;
box-sizing: border-box;
width: 100px;
height: 100px;
font-size: 3em;
font-weight: 700;
padding: 0 6px;
color: #fff;
text-shadow: -1px 0 black, 0 1px black, 1px 0 black, 0 -1px black;
border:1px dotted black;
}
article .tile.wide {
width: 200px;
}
article .tile.tall {
height: 200px;
}
.tile.yellow { background: yellow; }
.tile.red { background: red; }
.tile.blue { background: blue; }
.tile.black { background: black; }
.tile.grey { background: grey; }
.tile.green { background: green; }
To expand on Dan's answer, having just had this problem myself, it seems that Packery is a more up to date; much more maintained version of Masonry - from the same author. It's not clear to me why both projects exist as separate entities, with only typos fixed in the latter.
The good news is - it's almost totally a drop-in replacement. The only change I had to make (other than names masonry->packery where used) was to remove an option, because it is the default and only option in Packery.
That was isFitWidth: true, my feeble attempt to make Masonry pack things something close to how nicely Packery does without any options at all.
Another nice change with Packery is that gutter: x applies to vertical as well as horizontal gutters. In Masonry, this was horizontal only - though trivial with margin-bottom in CSS, this felt like a needless hack.
In the image below, you can see i have two tabs help and Instructions, i want to place these two tabs next to each other where the Help tab currently is. When i use the margin-left: property, only the help button moves to the left and the instructions button stays in the same place.
The css i am using to configure this:
.v-csslayout-topbarapplicant .v-button,
.v-csslayout-topbarapplicant .v-nativebutton,
.v-csslayout-topbarapplicant-invert .v-button,
.v-csslayout-topbarapplicant-invert .v-nativebutton {
float: right;
display: inline;
margin-right:0px;
margin-left: 268px;
margin-top: -18px;
padding: 0 3px 2px 0;
line-height: 11px;
}
How can i change the spacing so that both tabs (vaadin components) move together?
You need to make sure both items are wrapped with a div. Then you set the margin-left to that div, not only one of the items.
There's no way of telling in the CSS that you posted which items are being manipulated. If both of these items, "help" and "Instructions", are in the CSS you posted, then you to need to change it so that both items exist as one, meaning in one div. If only one of these items exist in your CSS that you posted, then you have only one of them being manipulated with the CSS, and that one is floating right. Ensure both items are floated in the same direction and they are wrapped. Apply the margin to this wrapper div.
The general structure should look like this:
CSS:
#help, #instructions {
float: right;
}
div#wrapper {
margin-left: 268px;
] /* wrapper containing both items, "help" and "Instructions" */
HTML:
<div id="wrapper">
<div id="help"></div>
<div id="instructions"></div>
</div>
I think that you are having some inheritance problems.
I would suggest first checking what inheritance this property is following, and if you still have problems I would then create separate divs for Help and Instructions, where instructions has a different right margin. I hope this helps! This type of problems are stubborn.
I am trying to achieve a layout where items will float like newspaper/magazine article sections. It is something similar as what jQuery's Masonry does. But I was trying to achieve that only using CSS3. I thought perhaps the box display property could do it. Although after trying for few times, I wasn't able to make the items slide down after the parent column width as fulfilled.
Is there any way to achieve this layout only using CSS?
The markup would be something like this:
<article>
<section>...</section>
<section>...</section>
<section>...</section>
<section>...</section>
</article>
Here a section would float left and adjust itself on the columns queue where better fit (and not bellow the baseline of the previous one, as simple float does).
It's possible using CSS columns. Here is a good explanation.
CSS:
div{
-moz-column-count: 3;
-moz-column-gap: 10px;
-webkit-column-count: 3;
-webkit-column-gap: 10px;
column-count: 3;
column-gap: 10px;
width: 480px; }
div a{
display: inline-block; /* Display inline-block, and absolutely NO FLOATS! */
margin-bottom: 20px;
width: 100%; }
HTML:
<div>
Whatever stuff you want to put in here. Images, text, movies, what have you. No, really, anything!
...and so on and so forth ad nauseum.
</div>
Also, I found this site by searching "CSS Masonry" on Google. It was the second result.
Is there any way to achieve this in CSS3?:
height: 100% -110px;
My context:
You can't calulate it with pure CSS. (it will not work in all browsers, as mentioned by Litek ) But there is a organizational way to handle this, but you will need to wrap you element in a other one:
body {
height; 100%;
padding: 0 0 20px;
}
div#wrap {
background: #fff;
height: 100%;
padding: 0 0 20px;
margin: 0 0 -20px;
}
div#wrap div { //this would be your actual element
height: 100%;
background: pink;
}
What you want to use is calc() that is comming to FF and propably webkit, but don't count on it being widely supported anytime soon.
As for your example, maybe sticky footer will be some inspiration for you.
Edit
Nowadays it's well supported by major browsers:
http://caniuse.com/calc
Directly like that i'm not aware of any feature widely adopted to do that.
But there is a easy method to achieve the effect.
Put all element inside a container <div> with 'height: 100%', this container should have position relative so you can position the other elements inside it relative to its position. place the header on top and the footer at bottom with absolute positioning and calculate with javascript the height that the content div must have.
You can also subscribe the 'window.onResize' event to recalculate when the window is resized.
I know this is not a clean and prety solution, but is the one the you can make work well in almost any browser.
In the context it was given the 2nd div height value doesn't really matter. Actually it's only important where that div starts and where it ends.
In other words height = vertical end - vertical start:
#div2 {
position:absolute;
top:90px;/*20+50+20*/
bottom:20px;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/cGwrw/3/