Do we have to use non-standard/browser specific CSS vendor prefixes anymore?
It really depends on which features and which browsers you want to fully support. Even now some browsers are lagging.
Here is a really excellent guide: http://caniuse.com/
Box Shadow on table row not appearing on certain browsers
As previously mentioned, box-shadow
property works only with elements that have display: block
or display:inline-block
property.
If you'll add display: block
to the table cell as a general styling rule, it will collapse, since automatic width/height proportions that cells had with display:table
won't be applied anymore. To simulate that behavior just assign min-width
attribute to each th
and td
.
Then apply box-shadow
to the row (on hover or without).
In summary, your code should look like this:
table { box-sizing: border-box; }
td, th { padding-left: 16px; min-width: 170px; text-align: left; }
tr { display: block; }
tr:hover { box-shadow: 0px 2px 18px 0px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); cursor: pointer; }
I've omitted vendor prefixes for simplicity.
Here is the full example:
table { box-sizing: border-box; border-bottom: 1px solid #e8e8e8;}td,th { padding-left: 16px; min-width: 170px; border: 1px solid #e8e8e8; border-bottom: none; font: 14px/40px; text-align: left;}td { color: #666;}tr { display: block;}th { color: #333;}tr:hover { background-color: #fbfbfb; box-shadow: 0px 2px 18px 0px rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.5); cursor: pointer;}
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <thead> <tr> <th>Phone number</th> <th>Date</th> <th>Name</th> <th>Label</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>0342443</td> <td>10 August 2013</td> <td>Kate</td> <td>Loves cats</td> </td> <tr> <td>0342442</td> <td>9 August 2013</td> <td>Mary</td> <td>Boring</td> </tr> <tr> <td>0342441</td> <td>8 August 2013</td> <td>Anna</td> <td>Loves extreme stuff</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Remove outline from select box in FF
I found a solution, but it is mother of all hacks, hopefully it will serve as a starting point for other more robust solutions. The downside (too big in my opinion) is that any browser that doesn't support text-shadow
but supports rgba
(IE 9) won't render the text unless you use a library such as Modernizr (not tested, just a theory).
Firefox uses the text color to determine the color of the dotted border. So say if you do...
select {
color: rgba(0,0,0,0);
}
Firefox will render the dotted border transparent. But of course your text will be transparent too! So we must somehow display the text. text-shadow
comes to the rescue:
select {
color: rgba(0,0,0,0);
text-shadow: 0 0 0 #000;
}
We put a text shadow with no offset and no blur, so that replaces the text. Of course older browser don't understand anything of this, so we must provide a fallback for the color:
select {
color: #000;
color: rgba(0,0,0,0);
text-shadow: 0 0 0 #000;
}
This is when IE9 comes into play: it supports rgba
but not text-shadow, so you will get an apparently empty select box. Get your version of Modernizr with text-shadow
detection and do...
.no-textshadow select {
color: #000;
}
Enjoy.
How can I center an absolutely positioned element in a div?
<body> <div style="position: absolute; left: 50%;"> <div style="position: relative; left: -50%; border: dotted red 1px;"> I am some centered shrink-to-fit content! <br /> tum te tum </div> </div></body>
How to fetch the background of DIV on a bottom layer with exact position using jQuery and CSS
Since you ask for alternatives to jQuery solutions
You could play a little with margins
and box-shadow
and keyframe animations.
Something in this direction for the shape (depends on what you want to do with which part - add content ... and in what way you want it to be responsive):
html:
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="header"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/CUbOIxr.png" alt="Company name" /></div>
<div class="content"></div>
</div>
CSS:
body {
background:orange;
width:100%;
height:100%;
}
.wrapper {
width:40%;
height:90%;
border:30px solid #000;
border-right-width:100px;
border-bottom-width:100px;
}
.header {
width:100%;
border-bottom:10px solid transparent;
-webkit-box-shadow: 0 30px 0 #000;
-moz-box-shadow: 0 30px 0 #000;
box-shadow: 0 30px 0 #000;
}
.header img {
width:100%;
}
.content {
width:95%;
height:400px;
background-color:#000;
margin-top:30px;
}
DEMO
This way no javascript is needed. And for the background you can use a linear gradient and do all animations with css transitions or keyframe animations. You also need to play with the lengths and adjust the borders and box-shadows to your needs, maybe add some @media queries for the responsiveness.
Hope this helps you a little in the right direction =)
Update:
I hoped the gradients changing was the smaller problem ;-) Silly me, sorry.
I will elaborate my CSS-only suggestion for the animation, but you can choose a javascript slider for the background animation, if you don't like CSS3 solutions - although this is the hot stuff now ;-)
Ok. So, I would add some more fixed positioned elements with gradient backgrounds (layer1 and layer2).
To have something in this direction in the html now:
<div class="layer layer1"></div>
<div class="layer layer2"></div>
<div class="wrapper">
<div class="header">
<img src="http://newtpond.com/test/company-name.png" alt="Company name" />
</div>
<div class="content"></div>
</div>
and add a keyframe animation on them in CSS (here it is just with the -webkit vendor prefix [probably cause I am a lazy bum], but I hope you can get the idea, and could add the others):
body {
width:100%;
height:100%;
margin:0;
padding:0;
}
/* for the animation */
.layer {
position:fixed;
width:100%;
height:100%;
}
@-webkit-keyframes GoLayer1 {
0% {
opacity:1;
}
50% {
opacity:0;
}
100% {
opacity:1;
}
}
@-webkit-keyframes GoLayer2 {
0% {
opacity:0;
}
50% {
opacity:1;
}
100% {
opacity:0;
}
}
.layer1 {
background: -webkit-linear-gradient(bottom, rgb(43, 70, 94) 29%, rgb(194, 41, 41) 65%, rgb(155, 171, 38) 83%);
-webkit-animation: GoLayer1 5s infinite;
}
.layer2 {
background: -webkit-linear-gradient(bottom, rgb(225, 202, 230) 29%, rgb(39, 163, 194) 65%, rgb(36, 124, 171) 83%);
-webkit-animation: GoLayer2 5s infinite;
}
/* the wrapper shape */
.wrapper {
z-index:999;
opacity:1;
position:relative;
width:40%;
height:90%;
border:30px solid #000;
border-right-width:100px;
border-bottom-width:100px;
}
.header {
width:100%;
border-bottom:10px solid transparent;
-webkit-box-shadow: 0 30px 0 #000;
-moz-box-shadow: 0 30px 0 #000;
box-shadow: 0 30px 0 #000;
}
.header img {
width:100%;
}
.content {
width:95%;
height:400px;
background-color:#000;
margin-top:28px;
}
DEMO (tested in Chrome 26 - looked cool =)
This is now where I can point you according this CSS-only approach. There is still stuff to modify and consider browser compatibility. But it is certainly an alternative ... and a step in the direction where html5 and css3 is going (if you want to be hot and cool ;-), hehe, sorry, too much silliness.
Good luck!
Update 2:
So, I overcame my laziness a tiny bit and added some more vendor prefixes to the top example (and of course you can use any image as background):
DEMO
And here I add another example, that is using a png image for the gradient, and is sliding up and down in the background (as another alternative):
DEMO
Related Topics
Advanced Custom Syntax Coloring for Aptana Studio 3 (.Less)
How to Implement a CSS-Only Fallback for Background-Size
Flexslider Fades But Will Not Slide
Make Position: Fixed Behavior Like Sticky (For Vue2)
Wget Downloads CSS @Import, But Ignores Files Referenced Within Them
How to Offset Line-Height Base Line
Why Doesn't Ie10 Display Nested CSS3 3D Transformed Elements
Reactjs Align Material-Ui Elements Horizontally
Adding CSS Styling to React Native Webview
Options to Solve Browser Compatibility Issues
Generate PDF with CSS and Images
Why Does an Inline-Block Div Get Positioned Lower When It Has Content
Import Font into React Application