Is there a way I can change this select drop down to a custom select drop down with a down arrow instead of the default quill arrows?
You can select ql-picker-label, and makes its default icon (the double pointing arrow) which is enclosed within an svg hidden, by setting display: none. Then, since the text itself is enclosed within the ::before pseudo-element, you can set the background-image on the ql-picker-label itself. The code below should be self-explanatory. However, because the text is within ::before element, I could not find an easy way to make space between the icon and the text. Perhaps, you can edit the icon image, and manually insert space before it.
This sample code below will select all ql-picker-label elements, you can avoid this behavior by entering more specific selectors.
.ql-picker-label svg {
display: none;
}
.ql-picker-label{
display: inline-block;
background-image: url("data:image/svg+xml;utf8,<svg fill='black' height='24' viewBox='0 0 24 24' width='24' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'><path d='M7 10l5 5 5-5z'/><path d='M0 0h24v24H0z' fill='none'/></svg>");
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-position: center right;
}
I have this jsfiddle script that I am having trouble to do the following:
Respond to button click.
To show the box drawn on the canvas
I know that I could make this work if I add "z-index: -1" to
var sss = `
.container:before {
content: "";
position: absolute;
width: 200%;
height: 200%;
top: -50%;
left: -50%;
background: url("${url}") 50% 50% no-repeat;
-webkit-transition: all 1s;
-moz-transition: all 1s;
-ms-transition: all 1s
-o-transition: all 1s;
transition: all 1s;
}
`;
$(`<style id="dynastyle" type='text/css'>${sss}</style>`).appendTo("head");
But I don't want to do that for a peculiar reason that is too complicated to explain here.
Does anyone know how to get this to work? To be honest, I have no idea why the button is not clickable. enter link description here
Also, I need to be able to draw on top of the canvas. BTW, I don't want to draw the image in the canvas.
After tweaking it for a few hours, I finally got it working. Basically I needed to do the following:
enclosing the buttons in a div that has the position attribute and z-index'd (I used 1, I believe that the default value is 0, giving 1 to the buttons makes it bigger than the 0 for the background image).
place the canvas in a different div and use absolute position to overlay it on top of the div that has the background image and use z-index 1.
When all these two things are done, I can remove the z-index on the dynamic style for the background image. What has giving me a lot of trouble during this was that I keep forgetting to add the position attribute on the elements involved in the layering.
So my image is 1920px x 150px
all I want is the image should remain at the center of the screen when the browser screen bocomes lessthan 1920px, it should auto hide an equal amount of pixels from left and right sides of the image.
eg., if the browser total width is 1520px, then 200px from left and 200px from right should be hidden (I don't want the image to be at the center allways)
Is there some way i can do this?
Thanks in advance
Instead of using the image in an <IMG> tag, use it as the background of a div, give it a class imgBG, and include these styles:
.imgBG{
background: url(images/imagename.jpg) no-repeat 50% top;
width: 100%;
height: 150px;
margin: auto;
}
I have the following css:
.btn_container {
cursor: pointer;
font-family: Tahoma,Verdana,Arial;
font-size: 11px;
padding: 0;
width: auto;
}
.btn_center {
background: blue;
color: #FFFFFF !important;
display: block;
float: left;
font-weight: bold;
height: 32px;
line-height: 32px;
padding: 0 10px;
}
line-height of 30 lines up center in firefox, but 32 in webkit.
I know browsers will render things differently, but i've never had a problem getting text to center properly.
In the following example you can see that it drops a couple px lower in firefox:
http://jsfiddle.net/mstefanko/EGzEB/5/
I've done heavy testing of this in the past. I call it text jiggle. It's not something you can control. All you can do to minimize it is apply an explicit line-height (especially one in px) to every text element.
The default line-height varies by a wide margin in different browsers, and for different font families at different font sizes. Setting an explicit line-height addresses that.
But within that, the exact placement of the text within the line-height space will vary slightly browser-to-browser no matter what you do. For some combinations of font-size and line-height, all browsers match up. For instance, Arial at font-size:11px and line-height:14px renders the same in FF, Webkit, and IE. But change the line-height to 13px or 15px, and it varies by 1px browser-to-browser.
There's no standard or defined behavior for it. It's the result of how that particular font-family, font-size, and line-height happens to be rendered by the browser on that operating system. Arial, for instance, is a relatively consistent font, generally not varying by more than 1px as long as an explicit line-height is defined, while Helvetica varies by as many as 4 to 6 pixels.
I had the opposite experience actually. I noted that some header elements were positioned higher in IE7/compatibility mode as well as Chrome/Safari. So after much trouble I inspected with chrome and saw -webkit-margin-before: 1.6em or something added to the headers. Adding that value and tweaking it didn't work because it effected the height of the header which pushed some elements down but the padding option worked well for me ...
I found that this worked for me:
H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, a.mainTab div {
-webkit-padding-before: 1px;
}
a.mainTab div had spans which wouldn't respond to the padding/margin so wrapped them in a div ... this may work for li span span headers as well.
Today I was designing a transparent PNG background that would only sit in the top left of a div, and the rest of the div would maintain a gradient background for all transparent areas of the PNG, and the rest of the div itself.
It might be better to explain through the code I thought might work:
#mydiv .isawesome {
/* Basic color for old browsers, and a small image that sits in the top left corner of the div */
background: #B1B8BD url('../images/sidebar_angle.png') 0 0 no-repeat;
/* The gradient I would like to have applied to the whole div, behind the PNG mentioned above */
background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, #ADB2B6 0%, #ABAEB3 100%);
background: -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(0%,#ADB2B6), color-stop(100%,#ABAEB3));
filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.gradient( startColorstr='#ADB2B6', endColorstr='#ABAEB3',GradientType=0 );
}
What I've been finding is that most browsers pick one or the other - most choosing the gradient since its further down the CSS file.
I know some of the guys around here will say "just apply the gradient to the PNG you're making" - but thats not ideal because the div will maintain a dynamic height - sometimes being very short, sometimes being very tall. I know this gradient isn't essential but I thought it might be worth asking y'all what you thought.
Is it possible to have a background image, while keeping the rest of the background as a gradient?
Keep in mind that a CSS gradient is actually an image value, not a color value as some might expect. Therefore, it corresponds to background-image specifically, and not background-color, or the entire background shorthand.
Essentially, what you're really trying to do is layering two background images: a bitmap image over a gradient. To do this, you specify both of them in the same declaration, separating them using a comma. Specify the image first, followed by the gradient. If you specify a background color, that color will always be painted underneath the bottom-most image, which means a gradient will cover it just fine, and it will work even in the case of a fallback.
Because you're including vendor prefixes, you will need to do this once for every prefix, once for prefixless, and once for fallback (without the gradient). To avoid having to repeat the other values, use the longhand properties1 instead of the background shorthand:
#mydiv .isawesome {
background-color: #B1B8BD;
background-position: 0 0;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
/* Fallback */
background-image: url('../images/sidebar_angle.png');
/* CSS gradients */
background-image: url('../images/sidebar_angle.png'),
-moz-linear-gradient(top, #ADB2B6 0%, #ABAEB3 100%);
background-image: url('../images/sidebar_angle.png'),
-webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, color-stop(0%, #ADB2B6), color-stop(100%, #ABAEB3));
background-image: url('../images/sidebar_angle.png'),
linear-gradient(to bottom, #ADB2B6, #ABAEB3);
/* IE */
filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.gradient(startColorstr='#ADB2B6', endColorstr='#ABAEB3', GradientType=0);
}
Unfortunately this doesn't work correctly in IE as it uses filter for the gradient, which it always paints over the background.
To work around IE's issue you can place the filter and the background image in separate elements. That would obviate the power of CSS3 multiple backgrounds, though, since you can just do layering for all browsers, but that's a trade-off you'll have to make. If you don't need to support versions of IE that don't implement standardized CSS gradients, you have nothing to worry about.
1 Technically, the background-position and background-repeat declarations apply to both layers here because the gaps are filled in by repeating the values instead of clamped, but since background-position is its initial value and background-repeat doesn't matter for a gradient covering the entire element, it doesn't matter too much. The details of how layered background declarations are handled can be found here.
You can use Transparency and gradients. Gradients support transparency. You can use this, for example, when stacking multiple backgrounds, to create fading effects on background images.
background: linear-gradient(to right, rgba(255,255,255,0) 20%,
rgba(255,255,255,1)), url(http://foo.com/image.jpg);
The order of the image and gradient is very KEY here, i want to make that clear. The gradient/image combo works best like this...
background: -webkit-gradient(linear, top, rgba(0,0,0,0.5), rgba(200,20,200,0.5)), url('../images/plus.png');
background-image will also work...
background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, top, rgba(0,0,0,0.5), rgba(200,20,200,0.5)), url('../images/plus.png');
the gradient needs to come first... to go on top. The absolute key here though is that the gradient uses at least 1 RGBA color... the color(s) need to be transparent to let the image come through. (rgba(20,20,20,***0.5***)). putting the gradient first in you css places the gradient on top of the image, so the lower the alpha setting on you RGBAs the more you see the image.
Now on the other hand if you use the reverse order the PNG needs to have transparent properties, just like the gradient, to let the gradient shine through. The image goes on top so your PNG needs to be saved as a 24 bit in photoshop with alpha areas... or a 32 bit in fireworks with alpha areas (or a gif i guess... barf), so you can see the gradient underneath. In this case the gradient can use HEX RGB or RGBA.
The key difference here is the look. The image will be much more vibrant when on top. When underneath you have the ability to tune the RGBA values in the browser to get the desired effect... instead of editing and saving back and forth from your image editing software.
Hope this helps, excuse my over simplification.
This is possible using multiple background syntax:
.example3 {
background-image: url(../images/plus.png), -moz-linear-gradient(top, #cbe3ba, #a6cc8b);
background-image: url(../images/plus.png), -webkit-gradient(linear, left top, left bottom, from(#cbe3ba), to(#a6cc8b));
}
I read about this at Here's One Solution.
UPDATED
* {
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
html,
body {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
}
.hero {
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
min-width: 100%;
min-height: 100%;
position: relative;
}
.hero::before {
background-image: url(https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1566640269407-436c75fc9495?ixlib=rb-1.2.1&ixid=eyJhcHBfaWQiOjEyMDd9&auto=format&fit=crop&w=750&q=80);
background-size: cover;
content: "";
display: block;
position: absolute;
top: 0;
left: 0;
width: 100%;
height: 100%;
z-index: -2;
opacity: 0.4;
}
<div class="hero flex-center">
<div class="hero-message">
<h1 class="hero-title">Your text</h1>
<h1 class="hero-sub-title">Your text2</h1>
</div>
</div>
<div class="not-hero flex-center bg-info">
<div class="not-hero-message">
<h1 class="hero-title">Your text</h1>
</div>
</div>
** It's working**
Transparent images are not yet a CSS standard, yet they are supported by most modern browsers. However, this is part of the W3C CSS3 recommendation. Implementation varies from one client to another, so you will have to use more than one syntax for cross-browser compatibility.
http://www.handycss.com/effects/transparent-image-in-css/