Confluence appears to be forcing minimum column width, as of the latest OD version.

    Steps to reproduce
    1. create a Page;
    2. in a Section, add two columns, with width set to 1200 px and 400px;
    3. save the Page and view it.

    Result in Confluence 5.3-OD-11: page is displayed correctly;
    Result in Confluence 5.3-OD-12: a horizontal scroll bar is added to the Section.

    (see screenshots)

    This behaviour does not change in different browsers or display sizes.

      1. 5.3-OD-11.png
        5.3-OD-11.png
        241 kB
      2. 5.3-OD-12.png
        5.3-OD-12.png
        238 kB

          [CONFCLOUD-54464] Confluence does not handle column-width correctly

          Hi,

          Our confluence site is also being impacted by this issue. It significantly breaks our page layout as well on even large monitors. We weren't having this issue a couple weeks ago, it just appeared out of the blue. What's frustrating is that the scroll bar appears even though it fills 99% of the scroll band; and the scroll doesn't re-size even when the browser window is reduced... We've already reconfigured our browsers in hopes of fixing, but the issue persists. We would prefer no scroll and responsive images, which is how the images use to operate.

          Thanks-

          Federico Negro added a comment - Hi, Our confluence site is also being impacted by this issue. It significantly breaks our page layout as well on even large monitors. We weren't having this issue a couple weeks ago, it just appeared out of the blue. What's frustrating is that the scroll bar appears even though it fills 99% of the scroll band; and the scroll doesn't re-size even when the browser window is reduced... We've already reconfigured our browsers in hopes of fixing, but the issue persists. We would prefer no scroll and responsive images, which is how the images use to operate. Thanks-

          Potential workaround: Use % instead of px for the width.

          Azwandi Mohd Aris (Inactive) added a comment - Potential workaround: Use % instead of px for the width.

          We've managed to find a workaround that works for OnDemand:

          1. Include the CSS Stylesheet macro into the space layout.
          2. Use the macro to override the styles of the columnMacro class for certain elements. In our case, we've disabled the minimum width requirement for our main content column.

          David Benovsky added a comment - We've managed to find a workaround that works for OnDemand: Include the CSS Stylesheet macro into the space layout. Use the macro to override the styles of the columnMacro class for certain elements. In our case, we've disabled the minimum width requirement for our main content column.

          David Ma added a comment -

          Hi David,

          Unfortunately, with the new changes to the section/column macros, there isn't a way to satisfy both your criteria.

          • For responsive column sizes, you will have to specify a percentage column width but, as you would know, this doesn't limit the max width
          • In order to set a fixed column width, the 'Column width' parameter would be set and is no longer responsive

          The decision to fix the width of the 'Column width' parameter was also due to a bug where the responsive column width would behave differently for different browsers and it was decided that the pixel column width would not be responsive in order to address the bug.

          The introduction of the scroll bar was due to another bug where the section/column macro would overflow into the grey section of a page if the dimensions were in excess of the window size.

          David Ma added a comment - Hi David, Unfortunately, with the new changes to the section/column macros, there isn't a way to satisfy both your criteria. For responsive column sizes, you will have to specify a percentage column width but, as you would know, this doesn't limit the max width In order to set a fixed column width, the 'Column width' parameter would be set and is no longer responsive The decision to fix the width of the 'Column width' parameter was also due to a bug where the responsive column width would behave differently for different browsers and it was decided that the pixel column width would not be responsive in order to address the bug. The introduction of the scroll bar was due to another bug where the section/column macro would overflow into the grey section of a page if the dimensions were in excess of the window size.

          Yes, this issue is impacting us. The change seriously breaks the layout of pages when viewed on moderately sized monitors or smaller devices. We'll probably need to think of a new layout and manually fix all pages.

          Since the change is deliberate, could you let us know if there's any way to create a responsive page layout now? We're looking for the following behavior:

          • Responsiveness on smaller monitors and devices (content taking up the entire available screen, no horizontal scrollbars for sections)
          • Limited maximum width on widescreen monitors (let's say 1200px for the main content, and a 400px sidebar column for some sections)

          We're aware that the best way to handle this is to work with a full width in the page layout itself, and use custom styles to limit the maximum content width. But that's currently not an option when using OnDemand.

          David Benovsky added a comment - Yes, this issue is impacting us. The change seriously breaks the layout of pages when viewed on moderately sized monitors or smaller devices. We'll probably need to think of a new layout and manually fix all pages. Since the change is deliberate, could you let us know if there's any way to create a responsive page layout now? We're looking for the following behavior: Responsiveness on smaller monitors and devices (content taking up the entire available screen, no horizontal scrollbars for sections) Limited maximum width on widescreen monitors (let's say 1200px for the main content, and a 400px sidebar column for some sections) We're aware that the best way to handle this is to work with a full width in the page layout itself, and use custom styles to limit the maximum content width. But that's currently not an option when using OnDemand.

          Thanks for the feedback.

          This behaviour has been introduced because we had too many requests from customers that there was not enough margins between section/column layouts.

          This was a deliberate change and we expect some minor tweaks need to happen to some pages.

          We have no plans on addressing this as many customers today have to create three columns to workaround this issue.

          If this issue is impacting you, feel free to comment on the ticket and let us know.

          Xavier Sanchez (Inactive) added a comment - Thanks for the feedback. This behaviour has been introduced because we had too many requests from customers that there was not enough margins between section/column layouts. This was a deliberate change and we expect some minor tweaks need to happen to some pages. We have no plans on addressing this as many customers today have to create three columns to workaround this issue. If this issue is impacting you, feel free to comment on the ticket and let us know.

            Unassigned Unassigned
            dwierzbicka Dobroslawa Wierzbicka (Inactive)
            Affected customers:
            1 This affects my team
            Watchers:
            10 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: