Sticky Footers in the age of coronavirus: It always comes down to FlexBox, just the implementation may vary
April 9th, 2020
- link to Sticky Footers in the age of coronavirus: It always comes down to FlexBox, just the implementation may vary podcast on anchorfm
I just completed a little local storage form application for my
students. I felt we needed something fun and silly to
uplift our spirits, so I created an application called
"Storage Fun With Forms".
I initially built it without a footer. I did something a bit
unorthodox with my image, which I knew would break the
sticky footer styling I normally add to my applications. In
fact, when I applied it with no adjustments, it did not
result in a sticky footer. It resulted in a horizontal layout
instead of the vertical one I began with, and my footer
ended up above the image. Why? Because I set the position
of the image to absolute.
I realized pretty quickly that I would have to remove my usual
sticky footer css, and create new css, emulating the
effects of my default sticky footer css.
Below is the sticky footer styling I would normally implement in
my applications:
// Sticky Footer Styling
:root {
--space: 1.5em 0;
--space: 2em 0;
}
.Site {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
min-height: 100vh;
}
.Site-content {
flex: 1 0 auto;
padding: var(--space) var(--space) 0;
width: 100%;
}
.Site-content:after {
content: '\00a0';
display: block;
margin-top: var(--space);
height: 0;
visibility: hidden;
}The following is what typical html markup would look like in
application’s index.html when implementing the sticky footer css:
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" />
<title>Note App: LocalStorage vs SessionsStorage</title>
<link
href="https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Arimo&display=swap"
rel="stylesheet"
/>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles/css/main.css" />
</head>
<body class="Site">
<div class="Site-content">
<div class="note-taker">
<h1 class="title">Note Taker To Session Storage App</h1>
<div class="storage-buttons">
<a class="clear">Clear Storage</a>
<a class="empty">Empty Storage</a>
</div>
<div id="storage-quota-msg"></div>
<div class="file-save-button">
<a id="save">Save Text To File for Download</a>
</div>
<div class="textarea-wrapper">
<textarea
name="text"
class="session-storage"
id="textArea"
cols="50"
rows="10"
>
Hello! I love JavaScript, and I prefer sessionStorage. How about you? 👍</textarea
>
<button type="button" id="save-text">Save Text</button>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<footer class="site-footer">
<script>
const theDate = new Date()
const footer = document.querySelector('.site-footer')
footer.style.fontWeight = '600'
footer.style.letterSpacing = '0.07rem'
footer.style.fontFamily = 'Arimo, sans-serif'
footer.innerHTML = `✝ © ${theDate.getFullYear()} Maria D. Campbell ✝`
</script>
</footer>
<script src="scripts/js/main.js"></script>
</body>
</html>First I removed the markup related to the sticky footer styling. I
removed the .Site class from the body tag, and the
.Site-content class from the div right below the body tag. Then
I removed that div altogether. It ruined the layout I had
created for this application, and I wanted to stay with it.
There had to be another way of achieving a sticky footer using Flexbox.
And there was!
My problem was that I had to create a certain amount of extra
space between my form area and the footer. But I had an image set
to position: absolute to contend with. Then there was the
responsive design aspect to consider. In smaller screens, how was
I going to get the position of the image to look relatively
the same in different viewport sizes?
First I had to make sure that I added enough extra space
between the footer and form so that: 1. the footer stuck to the bottom of
the document. 2. The amount of space between the form and the footer was enough
to address different device heights.
This meant using vh instead of % and definitely not px or rems.
First I set
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;on the body element selector. But that was not enough. I had to
figure out what height to set for the footer. I started with
25vh, and initially ended up with what I thought was the
magic number of 32vh. It was difficult to calculate this
scientifically since I was using vh. I tried, but then I decided to
roughly calculate by eye and then test out the footer vh
calculation in Chrome Developer Tools device mode and then in my
Google Pixel 2 smart phone. 32vh wasn’t too far off from my initial
calculation of 25vh. And it did not mess with my
absolutely positioned image.
This is what my footer styling looked like at first:
site-footer {
height: 32vh;
width: 100%;
font-size: 100%;
display: flex;
justify-content: center;
align-items: flex-end;
@media #{$min-411} {
font-size: 120%;
}
@media #{$min-600} {
font-size: 130%;
}
}But when I tested in bigger screens, i.e. 1924w x 2560h in
Safari responsive design mode, the footer did not quite make it all the way
to the bottom of the viewport. I eyeballed the viewport again, and
gave the .site-footer class a height of 50vh. Then the footer
almost stuck to the bottom. But it was still relatively too
high and could not be considered a sticky footer. Then I changed
the css to the following:
site-footer {
height: 50vh;
width: 100%;
font-size: 100%;
display: flex;
justify-content: center;
align-items: flex-end;
@media #{$min-411} {
font-size: 120%;
}
@media #{$min-600} {
font-size: 130%;
}
}This was better, and in both cases, the icing on the cake in the
css, was
align-items: flex-end;If I had not added that, the footer would have shown up
even higher in the viewport!
For the height of 2560px (derived from responsive mode in Safari), I
changed the footer height to 67vh:
.site-footer {
height: 67vh;
}But this did not work. Nothing changed. I had to find a
solution that worked across all viewport heights up
to and including 2560px. I decided to not try and increase
the footer vh height beyond 50vh using the media query of
min-height: 2560px, but instead changed the body>.wrapper’s (using
the > greater than symbol indicating that the div with the .wrapper
class was a child of the body element) margin-bottom from an
explicit amount of 6rem to an explicit vh of 22vh:
body > .wrapper {
margin-top: 9rem;
}and
body > .wrapper {
margin-bottom: 22vh;
}This DID work across different viewport heights up to and
including the height of 2560px. And I did not have to add
another media query targeting the min-height of 2560px.
I went this way because the html markup I had created for this
application was too complex and different from my usual
html markup. It was a quicker, easier solution and
delivered the same results. Given the current situation, it will
have to do!
The css is much more terse than my original sticky footer css,
but the concept remains the same. To make sure that enough space
was added between the form content and the footer, and that it
would appear the same no matter what height the viewport was. BTW,
I also use vh in my regular sticky footer css. My .Site
class which I set on the body element in index.html usually
looks like this:
.Site {
display: flex;
flex-direction: column;
min-height: 100vh;
}Next, I had to address some cross-browser compatibility styling
issues. I forgot that I should not tamper with the user agent
styling of certain elements, otherwise they look very
different in different browsers. The user agent styling,
however, potentially looks pretty much the same across
browsers.
I reverted back to the user agent styling for the select
element. In addition, I had to set an explicit width on the
inputs with the color type. Initially, I did the following with the inputs
of type color:
input[name='color'] {
width: 100%;
max-width: calc(250px - 0px);
height: 1.5rem;
}In Chrome, everything looked as I expected, but in Firefox, only a
sliver's worth of color input width showed up, and in Safari,
no color input appeared at all. Since I had to set an explicit width
in pxs or rems, for example, I made the width 200px so that it would
fit within the body.>wrapper in an iphone 4 (and I didn’t find it
necessary to make it any bigger in wider screens). I ended up using the
following css for my color inputs:
input[name='color'] {
width: 100%;
width: 200px;
height: 1.5rem;
margin-top: 0.5rem;
margin-bottom: 0.5rem;
}Everything rendered as expected across browsers. You should test it out for yourself!
The other interesting thing I noticed was that the
color picker itself also somewhat varied across browsers.
That I could not change. The way they rendered to the
page did not vary drastically, just slightly, but there
definitely was a difference. The look is most similar
between Safari and Chrome. They both use the -webkit vendor prefix
after all. The biggest difference shows up in Firefox, as it uses
the -moz vendor prefix, and therefore its rendering engine
potentially displays things differently. The concept that all
browsers render things in the same way and that all css is
cross-browser compatible is a fallacy! That also applies to the
user-agent stylesheets.
I ended up with the following css for the select element:
select {
margin-top: 0.5rem;
width: 200px;
&:first-of-type {
margin-bottom: 0.5rem;
}
}I did not make any changes to the select element except to the
width property. I also used the select element selector
instead of a class or id.
These are difficult times, and sometimes it is difficult to
focus. My advice: check your work even more carefully than under normal
circumstances. Sometimes you might find little errors due to lack
of focus, negative distractions, or due to one’s wandering
thoughts in reaction to the current status of the world. As
the (unattributable) saying goes,
"If you’re going through hell, keep going". As with everything else,
this too shall (eventually) pass. Eventually it will, so
don’t act like it won’t!
I will be embedding this episode of Plugging in The Holes along with a transcript in the form of a post on interglobalmedianetwork.com for your hearing and reading pleasure. Bye for now!
Related Resources
Created by Maria D. Campbell who lives and works in New York City building and teaching useful things. You should follow her on Twitter.