• 0

Javascript to auto scale webpage


Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  On 22/03/2014 at 21:36, Seahorsepip said:

Yeah IE is a acting like a bad boy again...

Fix:

 

css:

body {
	overflow-x: hidden;
}

additional js file called iefix.js

function detectIE() {
	var ua = window.navigator.userAgent;
	var msie = ua.indexOf('MSIE ');
	var trident = ua.indexOf('Trident/');
	if (msie > 0) {
		return parseInt(ua.substring(msie + 5, ua.indexOf('.', msie)), 10);
	}
	if (trident > 0) {
		var rv = ua.indexOf('rv:');
		return parseInt(ua.substring(rv + 3, ua.indexOf('.', rv)), 10);
	}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
	if(detectIE()){
		fix = $(window).width()/$("body table tbody").width()*75/2;
		$("body").css("margin-left","-"+fix+"%");
	}
});
$(window).on('resize', function(){
	if(detectIE()){
		fix = $(window).width()/$("body table tbody").width()*75/2;
		$("body").css("margin-left","-"+fix+"%");
	}
});

Let's see if that works

 

Edit: Changed px to % in code

Edit2: added "-"+

Edit3: changed ,, to , just a typo

 

Should work now(just tested).

 

Better in IE, but seems to still cause a bit of an issue when re-sizing the browser window, relative to where the window is located on the screen.

 

Be back in a bit BTW, time to cut the lawn.

  • 0
  On 22/03/2014 at 21:44, Brandon Live said:

I don't understand what you're trying to do here or why you're applying a crazy hack like that in IE (especially on IE 11!). Clearly you're doing something wrong if you think that is necessary...

If it only happens on IE it's clearly a IE fault as far as I can guess and yeah the hack didn't work I just noticed :/

  On 22/03/2014 at 21:46, xendrome said:

Better in IE, but seems to still cause a bit of an issue when re-sizing the browser window, relative to where the window is located on the screen.

Just noticed too yeah.

could you remove the code so I can try making some other code instead?

  • 0
  On 22/03/2014 at 21:46, Seahorsepip said:

If it only happens on IE it's clearly a IE fault as far as I can guess and yeah the hack didn't work I just noticed :/

Just noticed too yeah.

could you remove the code so I can try making some other code instead?

 

Removed iefix.js for now.

  • 0

This might work:

css:

body {
	width: 748px;
        overflow-x: hidden;
}

js to use instead of current js:

$(document).ready(function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body table tbody").width()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
	document.documentElement.style.zoom = "75%";
});
$(window).on('resize', function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body table tbody").width()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
	document.documentElement.style.zoom = "75%";
});
  • 0
  On 22/03/2014 at 21:46, Seahorsepip said:

If it only happens on IE it's clearly a IE fault as far as I can guess and yeah the hack didn't work I just noticed :/

 

That's simply not true. Just because something works in one browser doesn't mean it's correct.

 

Depending on your goal, a scale transform may work better (on newer browsers like IE9+ anyway). You can set that via CSS (if you just want a fixed scale) or JS if you want to calculate the ratio dynamically. For example, something roughly like:

 

body {

    -ms-transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    -ms-transform-origin: top left;

    -webkit-transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    -webkit-transform-origin: top left;

    -moz-transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    -moz-transform-origin: top left;

    transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    transform-origin: top left;

}

 

Of course for RTL, you'd want to scale from top right and translate a positive number.

 

However, depending on your goal, you might be better off with viewport settings and just using a fixed viewport size. Then the browser will automatically calculate how to make it fit.

 

I'm wary of the notion of trying to use the window vs body size as you did. For example, IE sets a default zoom of 125% or 150% on higher DPI screens, which may throw off some of your calculations. I think that's why the jquery docs basically say not to do that with .width() on "window". But maybe it's not a problem.

 

I don't know why you need jquery for that though, you'd probably be better off just using window.innerWidth and document.body.clientWidth directly.

  • 0
  On 22/03/2014 at 22:13, Brandon Live said:

That's simply not true. Just because something works in one browser doesn't mean it's correct.

 

Depending on your goal, a scale transform may work better (on newer browsers like IE9+ anyway). You can set that via CSS (if you just want a fixed scale) or JS if you want to calculate the ratio dynamically. For example, something roughly like:

 

body {

    -ms-transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    -ms-transform-origin: top left;

    -webkit-transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    -webkit-transform-origin: top left;

    -moz-transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    -moz-transform-origin: top left;

    transform: scale(1.5) translateX(-25vw);

    transform-origin: top left;

}

 

Of course for RTL, you'd want to scale from top right and translate a positive number.

 

However, depending on your goal, you might be better off with viewport settings and just using a fixed viewport size. Then the browser will automatically calculate how to make it fit.

 

I'm wary of the notion of trying to use the window vs body size as you did. For example, IE sets a default zoom of 125% or 150% on higher DPI screens, which may throw off some of your calculations. I think that's why the jquery docs basically say not to do that with .width() on "window". But maybe it's not a problem.

 

I don't know why you need jquery for that though, you'd probably be better off just using window.innerWidth and document.body.clientWidth directly.

I just used jQuery because I'm lazy and your method doesn't fix the centering issue.

 

And you can better use the css zoom property then transform for compatibility.

  • 0

Can't find so quickly a method to solve your zoom problem when you want to use 75% instead of 100% :/

Gotta go now, maybe someone else finds a solution in the meantime while I'm gone else I'll see if I can find a fix tomorrow ;)

  • 0
  On 22/03/2014 at 22:15, Seahorsepip said:

I just used jQuery because I'm lazy and your method doesn't fix the centering issue.

Umm what centering issue?

 

  Quote

And you can better use the css zoom property then transform for compatibility.

CSS zoom is non-standard and has a lot of obscure side effects. That's why sites like CSS-Tricks say not to use it on production sites.

  • 0

Ok so currently I have

 

zoom.js

$(document).ready(function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body table tbody").width()*75;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
	document.documentElement.style.zoom = "100%";
});
$(window).on('resize', function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body table tbody").width()*75;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
	document.documentElement.style.zoom = "100%";
});

and the CSS

body {
font-size: 11px;
font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
text-align: left;
margin: 0;
width: 755px;
overflow-x: hidden;
padding: 0
}

And the ONLY issue is it is aligning the site to the left in both IE and Chrome.

 

EDIT: Ok so changing the: width: 755px; to 1024px seems to have fixed it in IE and Chrome

Seahorsepip, whenever you get a moment, please check it on your end also and see if you find any weird layout issues :)

 

I will post back here if I find any myself.

  • 0
  On 22/03/2014 at 22:38, Brandon Live said:

Umm what centering issue?

CSS zoom is non-standard and has a lot of obscure side effects. That's why sites like CSS-Tricks say not to use it on production sites.

The content is left aligned and margin auto won't work correctly because of the transform :/

And I know zoom isn't a good fix but so is css3 transform, the best fix would be mediaqueries and making it responsive. But I guess he has a reason why he wanted it to work like this :P

  • 0
  On 23/03/2014 at 00:42, Seahorsepip said:

The content is left aligned and margin auto won't work correctly because of the transform :/

I don't understand why that would be the case. Just adjust the math for where you want to put it?

  Quote

And I know zoom isn't a good fix but so is css3 transform, the best fix would be mediaqueries and making it responsive. But I guess he has a reason why he wanted it to work like this :p

At least transform is standardized and works in most browsers. You can even do it in IE8 with the filter stuff, though I don't know if that has any limitations which would apply here.

And yeah, the whole idea of zooming a fixed layout is not a good solution for most situations. Maybe for a game or something? I know some people like to do that for Win8 games and use WinJS's ViewBox control to handle scaling it. That just does the same thing I mentioned (sets scale + translate transforms in JS after calculating the right values). It doesn't seem to have any alignment issues...

  • 0
  On 23/03/2014 at 00:35, Seahorsepip said:

Use the *100 with "body" in the js which I first posted and set body css width: 748px; and padding: 0 80px; that might work.

 

Yeah no go on that, shifts the whole page over 80px on Chrome/ IE11, so it cuts off the right side.

  On 23/03/2014 at 00:51, Brandon Live said:

I don't understand why that would be the case. Just adjust the math for where you want to put it?

 

Hey Brandon, if you'd like to take a stab at it, I can give you the URL in PM. The goal is, to have it adjust larger automatically because on high-res screens the site is very small-fixed width and makes it hard to read.

  • 0
  On 23/03/2014 at 00:57, xendrome said:

Hey Brandon, if you'd like to take a stab at it, I can give you the URL in PM. The goal is, to have it adjust larger automatically because on high-res screens the site is very small-fixed width and makes it hard to read.

Isn't that why high DPI systems default to a higher scale in the browser? (I know IE on Win7 / Win8 does this, and I think Macs do something similar at least on Retina displays)

  • 0

This idea seems flawed to me, if the site content is so small then simply zooming in probably won't have the desired effect, everything will be huge and you'll end up seeing less of the page since the content will be pushed off the bottom of the screen (Say it's a fixed 640 width viewed on a 1920x1080 screen, everything will be blown up to 3 times it's normal size, 16px body text would become 48px, etc.)

 

  On 22/03/2014 at 22:13, Brandon Live said:

...

I'm wary of the notion of trying to use the window vs body size as you did. For example, IE sets a default zoom of 125% or 150% on higher DPI screens, which may throw off some of your calculations. I think that's why the jquery docs basically say not to do that with .width() on "window". But maybe it's not a problem.

...

Yeah, it shouldn't be a problem because the browser should be returning those values in CSS pixels instead of device pixels, so they should scale with the display density (Which is also why the page should look the same between a "96dpi" screen and a "192dpi" screen, the browser/OS scales all drawing)

  • 0

We're doing quite bad practise here but whatever here's the code that should work:

 

js:

$(document).ready(function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
});
$(window).on('resize', function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
});

css:

body {
	width: 748px;
	overflow-x: hidden;
	padding: 0 80px; /* Change 80px to increase/decrease zoom size */
}
  • 0
  On 23/03/2014 at 11:10, The_Decryptor said:

"zoom" is an old IE only thing, it won't work in Firefox/Chrome/Safari/Opera/etc.

zoom: value;

Works fine on webkit browsers, ie uses -ie-zoom: value;

It should work on opera now too but it fails to work on firefox :/

 

I'll give css transforms another try even though it works not as I want right now.

  • 0

Here's a method using transforms then:

 

js for all modern browsers and IE9:

$(document).ready(function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth();
	$("body").css("transform","scale("+zoom+")");
        $("body").css("-ms-transform","scale("+zoom+")");
});
$(window).on('resize', function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth();
	$("body").css("transform","scale("+zoom+")");
        $("body").css("-ms-transform","scale("+zoom+")");
});

css:

body {
	width: 748px;
	overflow-x: hidden;
	padding: 0 80px; /* Change 80px to increase/decrease zoom size */
	transform-origin: top left;
        -ms-transform-origin: top left;
}

and js for IE8 and older:

$(document).ready(function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
});
$(window).on('resize', function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
});

IE8 js code should be put in a conditional tag like this:

<head>
<!--[if lt IE 8 ]>
<script type="text/javascript">
$(document).ready(function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
});
$(window).on('resize', function(){
	zoom = $(window).width()/$("body").outerWidth()*100;
	document.body.style.zoom = zoom+"%";
});
</script>
<![endif]-->
</head>

This should be the correct code then I suppose, though the whole scaling idea isn't great lol

  • 0
  On 23/03/2014 at 11:49, Seahorsepip said:

zoom: value;

Works fine on webkit browsers, ie uses -ie-zoom: value;

It should work on opera now too but it fails to work on firefox :/

 

I'll give css transforms another try even though it works not as I want right now.

Well that's a shame, although with the state of WebKit it's honestly not that surprising.

  • 0
  On 23/03/2014 at 12:00, Seahorsepip said:
This should be the correct code then I suppose, though the whole scaling idea isn't great lol

 

So if I do this, which I currently have active, it seems like I have to increase the padding to like 800 to get it zoomed out enough, and as I increase the padding, it shifts the whole site over. Seahorsepip, if you can, look at the live site, I have it enabled now.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This site is just old men ranting at clouds. Neowin knows its audience.
    • That's nice and all. but I generally just stick with Lutris paired with 'ge-proton' (which gets updated fairly often (June 1st was last update) as the 'ge-proton' entry in Lutris uses stuff here... https://github.com/GloriousEggroll/proton-ge-custom/releases ) and the like to play my games. p.s. if a person wants to stick with a specific version from that link you can download a specific version and extract it to "~/.local/share/lutris/runners/proton/". then select it in Lutris options on game shortcut is the basic idea. because by default the standard 'ge-proton' entry will automatically get updated which can occasionally cause issues even though it's usually fine. but manually setting it on a specific version will prevent the standard updates on 'ge-proton' from messing with it on a particular game you may have issues with if that gets updated etc. one good example of the 'ge-proton' updates messing with a game in particular is the offline version of RDR2 1491.50 as I setup a specific version there and after removing the 'vulkan-1 (native)' entry in 'Wine configuration' on 'RDR2.exe' entry (if you don't remove this the game won't start up) is when the 'ge-proton' updates, it will restore that 'vulkan-1 (native)' entry and prevent the game from working. you can always remove the entry on the RDR2.exe in Wine configuration specifically after updates, but doing that everytime that updates will get old quickly. hence, keeping it on a specific GE Proton version stops me from having to mess with it as then you just adjust it once and you are done with it. also, when using 'bat' files to start a game (like Hitman: WoA for example using Peacock etc) I had some issues with GE Proton after '9-27', so I got the game locked to '9-27' (April 1st) instead of the newer ones (10-1 etc).
    • Sam Altman says AI could soon help with discovering new knowledge by Hamid Ganji OpenAI is currently at the forefront of developing powerful AI models, while its ChatGPT product is rewriting our traditional way of looking for new information. The company's CEO, Sam Altman, now says AI could even help humans discover new knowledge. He also described AI agents as junior employees. Speaking at the Snowflake Summit 2025, Altman boasted that AI agents can act like junior employees, saying, "You hear people that talk about their job now is to assign work to a bunch of agents, look at the quality, figure out how it fits together, give feedback, and it sounds a lot like how they work with a team of still relatively junior employees." OpenAI CEO also added AI agents could help humans discover new knowledge in "limited cases" or "figure out solutions to business problems that are kind of very non-trivial." While the use of AI for scientific discovery is still viewed with skepticism, the technology has proven its capabilities for new discoveries in several cases. For example, the Microsoft Discovery platform, designed for accelerating scientific research and development by AI agents, was recently able to discover a new chemical for cooling data centers in just 200 hours, a process that normally takes years to research and complete by humans. AI firms are also shifting their focus toward developing AI agents capable of performing various tasks. OpenAI recently unveiled Codex, which contains AI agents for helping programmers write and debug code. According to Altman, OpenAI engineers are already using Codex. As AI agents become more intelligent, more employees should be concerned about losing their jobs. Companies have already started replacing some specific roles with AI. For example, Duolingo has replaced its contract workers with AI, while Shopify managers need to provide reasons why AI cannot handle a job before seeking approval for new hires. Via: Business Insider
    • I personally don't think there will be many survivors past the ESU date, but I can be wrong🙂 >Firefox still supports Windows 7 (until the end of August), which will be just over 16 years since release. Well, yes, but it's an ESR version, which kind of doesn't count as fresh for me. So the last mainline version of Firefox with W7 support was 115, which was released in 2023, exactly around the W7 ESU expiration.
    • Hey, sounds like it’s definitely time for an upgrade. The R7000 had an excellent run! If you want lots of wired ports and future-proofing, the Asus RT-BE88U is a killer choice. It’s got 2x 10GbE, 4x 2.5GbE, and handles WiFi 7 like a champ. Super fast, stable, and the ASUS firmware is solid with loads of features. The TP-Link BE900 is also great, sleek design, strong performance, and a combo 10G port (RJ45/SFP+), but it has fewer wired ports than the Asus. Netgear RS700S is powerful too, but the firmware isn’t as flexible and only has one 10G port. It might feel familiar from your R7000. If wired ports are a big deal, maybe adding a 2.5G or 10G switch later gives you more options. My vote is RT-BE88U all the way.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      nothin earned a badge
      First Post
    • Enthusiast
      Epaminombas went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Posting Machine
      Fiza Ali earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • One Year In
      WaynesWorld earned a badge
      One Year In
    • First Post
      chriskinney317 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      186
    2. 2
      snowy owl
      130
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      119
    5. 5
      +FloatingFatMan
      96
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!