Fix /cloud layout collisions below the 1200px design width - #946
Merged
Conversation
Three separate problems, all on the cloud page. The features section was capped at max-width 1200px but only got a horizontal inset at <=767px, so everything between 768px and 1279px ran edge to edge — in both the side-by-side and the stacked layout. It now takes the same calc(100% - 64px) / calc(100% - 32px) insets the sibling ComparisonSection already used. Its cards also sized the image and copy as fixed, non-shrinking flex items (720px + 400px = 1120px) distributed by space-between alone. Below a 1120px content box the gap collapsed to zero and then overflowed. The image is now shrinkable with an explicit 80px gap as the floor, and carries its 720/400 aspect ratio so it scales down instead of cropping. space-between still distributes any leftover space, so the >=1264px rendering is unchanged: 1200px section, 720x400 image, 400px copy, 80px gap. CloudIntegrationSection had the same missing inset — its .inner and .customers were unconstrained between 768px and 1279px. The hero subtitle was pinned to width 400px with flex 0 0 400px. The mobile block cleared max-width but not width, so on a 375px phone it stayed 400px and bled 12px off both edges. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
vishxrad
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Three separate layout problems on
/cloud, all appearing below the 1200px design width. Branched off latestmain, independent of #945.1. Features section ran edge to edge (768–1279px)
.sectionwas capped atmax-width: 1200pxbut only received a horizontal inset inside@media (max-width: 767px). Everything from 768px to 1279px rendered flush against both viewport edges — in the side-by-side layout and in the stacked one, which is why it looked broken at both ends of that range.Now uses the same insets the sibling
ComparisonSectionalready applied:calc(100% - 64px)at ≤1279px andcalc(100% - 32px)at ≤767px.2. Card gap collapsed to zero, then overflowed (1024–1263px)
The image and copy were fixed, non-shrinking flex items —
flex: 0 0 720pxandflex: 0 0 400px, totalling 1120px — with the space between them produced entirely byjustify-content: space-between. That only works when the content box is wider than 1120px. At exactly 1120px the gap became zero; below it the card overflowed its own container.The image is now
flex: 0 1 720pxwithmin-width: 0, and the card carries an explicitgap: 80pxas a floor.space-betweenstill distributes any leftover space, so the ≥1264px rendering is byte-for-byte the original design. The image also carriesaspect-ratio: 720 / 400, so it scales down rather than cropping as it narrows.3. Hero subtitle bled off both edges on phones
.subtitlewas pinned withwidth: 400pxandflex: 0 0 400px. The≤767pxblock clearedmax-widthbut neverwidth, so on a 375px phone it stayed 400px wide and overhung 12px on each side.Measured results
Verified in-browser at each width, measuring real bounding boxes rather than eyeballing:
documentElement.scrollWidthnever exceeds the viewport at any tested width.Site-wide audit
Swept
/,/openclaw-os,/compareand/cloudat 1100px and 375px with a script flagging elements that overflow the viewport or sit within 12px of an edge, and separately grepped every CSS module for centeredmax-widthcontainers lacking a horizontal inset.Everything outside
/cloudis clean. Two things flagged and deliberately not changed, because both are intentional:CompatibilitySectionon/—.rowsusesmargin: 0 -20pxto break the chip marquee out of the section inset, with the inner viewport clipping viaoverflow-x: hidden. Standard full-bleed pattern.HeroSectionon/openclaw-os— an oversized illustration inside.mobileIllustrationViewport, which clips it by design.ComparisonSectionwas flagged by the static grep but is genuinely fine — it uses the width-calc mechanism rather than padding, which the grep didn't recognise. The in-browser audit correctly cleared it.Notes
CSS-only.
maincurrently carries 5 pre-existingtscerrors and 1 ESLint error; this branch has exactly the same counts, so nothing new is introduced. Prettier clean on all three files.🤖 Generated with Claude Code