we know, that floating inline divs need a clearfix in order to work properly. We usually would do this with the overflow:hidden (parent-div) to achieve.
But there is one slightly problem with it:
Asumed the floating div has a menu with submenus, the submenu will be cut-off by the overflow:hidden. To fix I created the following style:
and gave the parent-div the “class”=“clearfix”
Would it make sense to actionize this? I’m asking you cause I am lost in things like this?
This could make a great Action, I’ll see if I have a moment to do this, or maybe Tim wins the race, since he gets to start earlier in the day than me…
Walter
On Jul 25, 2012, at 5:50 AM, Thomas Kimmich wrote:
Hi the devs,
we know, that floating inline divs need a clearfix in order to work properly. We usually would do this with the overflow:hidden (parent-div) to achieve.
But there is one slightly problem with it:
Asumed the floating div has a menu with submenus, the submenu will be cut-off by the overflow:hidden. To fix I created the following style:
Thanks Walter. I guess the question is what process you want to run first. Rather than updating all of the existing Actions that target divs to work with these HTML5 items the HTML5 Elements Action could simply rename the target items at the end of the publishing process. Unfortunately it would compete with a lot of other Actions that also like to run at the end of the publishing process. Already this is becoming a crowded area for Actions.
For the moment I’ve updated the Clearfix Action to include the HTML5 items as well as added a folder variant that will apply the class to any parent item that has floated children. Can you think of a situation where this wouldn’t be required by default. My intent is to create a ‘set and forget’ Action that corrects the disconnect between the design view and the preview for items with floated content. http://www.freewayactions.com/code/?f=Clearfix.fwaction
Regards,
Tim.
On 25 Jul 2012, at 17:15, Walter Lee Davis wrote:
Well, this was just what we were talking about earlier:
var thisDiv = fwDocument.fwTags.fwFind(“div”,fwItem);
ought to include all of the div-like HTML5 elements as well as div.
Maybe, if you really want this to be fire-and-forget, you would skip the item-action altogether, and just have the page- and folder-action variants. That seems to be the easiest route. Again, take a look at the Prototype methods in CSS3 Shadow Action (and other Scripty Actions). hasClassName() and friends will help abstract out the middle of your Action.
Walter
On Jul 25, 2012, at 1:22 PM, Tim Plumb wrote:
Thanks Walter. I guess the question is what process you want to run first. Rather than updating all of the existing Actions that target divs to work with these HTML5 items the HTML5 Elements Action could simply rename the target items at the end of the publishing process. Unfortunately it would compete with a lot of other Actions that also like to run at the end of the publishing process. Already this is becoming a crowded area for Actions.
For the moment I’ve updated the Clearfix Action to include the HTML5 items as well as added a folder variant that will apply the class to any parent item that has floated children. Can you think of a situation where this wouldn’t be required by default. My intent is to create a ‘set and forget’ Action that corrects the disconnect between the design view and the preview for items with floated content. http://www.freewayactions.com/code/?f=Clearfix.fwaction
Regards,
Tim.
On 25 Jul 2012, at 17:15, Walter Lee Davis wrote:
Well, this was just what we were talking about earlier:
var thisDiv = fwDocument.fwTags.fwFind(“div”,fwItem);
ought to include all of the div-like HTML5 elements as well as div.
Uses common functions to do more of the grunt work
Now includes a page Action
Places the page variables under the action namespace (something I hope the FW API will add sometime soon) to try and prevent variable clashes
I’m done with this Action. If anyone wants to have a go then feel free otherwise i’ll upload it to ActionsForge.
Regards,
Tim.
On 25 Jul 2012, at 18:28, Walter Lee Davis wrote:
Maybe, if you really want this to be fire-and-forget, you would skip the item-action altogether, and just have the page- and folder-action variants. That seems to be the easiest route. Again, take a look at the Prototype methods in CSS3 Shadow Action (and other Scripty Actions). hasClassName() and friends will help abstract out the middle of your Action.
Uses common functions to do more of the grunt work
Now includes a page Action
Places the page variables under the action namespace (something I hope the FW API will add sometime soon) to try and prevent variable clashes
I’m done with this Action. If anyone wants to have a go then feel free otherwise i’ll upload it to ActionsForge.
Regards,
Tim.
On 25 Jul 2012, at 18:28, Walter Lee Davis wrote:
Maybe, if you really want this to be fire-and-forget, you would skip the item-action altogether, and just have the page- and folder-action variants. That seems to be the easiest route. Again, take a look at the Prototype methods in CSS3 Shadow Action (and other Scripty Actions). hasClassName() and friends will help abstract out the middle of your Action.
It’s correct. The star is used to target IE6 and IE7 only. If you went with “zoom: 1” then all browsers would use it – and since it’s both non-standard and unnecessary, that would be a bad thing.
The *zoom gets flagged 277 times by Safari as invalid CSS when I use the Bootstrap framework. I wish there was a better way to trigger hasLayout in IE. I usually use overflow:hidden, but that has its own issues, and keeps you from doing anything clever with absolute positioning.
Walter
On Apr 17, 2014, at 8:15 AM, Joe Billings wrote:
It’s correct. The star is used to target IE6 and IE7 only. If you went with “zoom: 1” then all browsers would use it – and since it’s both non-standard and unnecessary, that would be a bad thing.
A lot of people seem to use an underscore in place of a star. Does that also get flagged by Safari?
Joe
On 17 Apr 2014, at 13:29, Walter Lee Davis email@hidden wrote:
The *zoom gets flagged 277 times by Safari as invalid CSS when I use the Bootstrap framework. I wish there was a better way to trigger hasLayout in IE. I usually use overflow:hidden, but that has its own issues, and keeps you from doing anything clever with absolute positioning.
Walter
On Apr 17, 2014, at 8:15 AM, Joe Billings wrote:
It’s correct. The star is used to target IE6 and IE7 only. If you went with “zoom: 1” then all browsers would use it – and since it’s both non-standard and unnecessary, that would be a bad thing.
I don’t know. I figure the boys and girls at Twitter have used whatever gets the layout to work, and are taking the error report as a geek-world problem. I suppose I could try a find-and-replace and see if the layout falls to pieces.
Walter
On Apr 17, 2014, at 9:02 AM, Joe Billings wrote:
A lot of people seem to use an underscore in place of a star. Does that also get flagged by Safari?
Joe
On 17 Apr 2014, at 13:29, Walter Lee Davis email@hidden wrote:
The *zoom gets flagged 277 times by Safari as invalid CSS when I use the Bootstrap framework. I wish there was a better way to trigger hasLayout in IE. I usually use overflow:hidden, but that has its own issues, and keeps you from doing anything clever with absolute positioning.
Walter
On Apr 17, 2014, at 8:15 AM, Joe Billings wrote:
It’s correct. The star is used to target IE6 and IE7 only. If you went with “zoom: 1” then all browsers would use it – and since it’s both non-standard and unnecessary, that would be a bad thing.
underscore isn’t flagged in Safari and (as far as I can see) even the artwork didn’t explode so all fine (however I can’t judge if it works a treat - but think so.
Thanks for being the nose-cone. That totally works here as well.
Walter
On Apr 17, 2014, at 10:43 AM, Thomas Kimmich wrote:
underscore isn’t flagged in Safari and (as far as I can see) even the artwork didn’t explode so all fine (however I can’t judge if it works a treat - but think so.
