CSS Naked Day

I agree. I don't think I'll be doing this. While my sites work well without styles, this really isn't going to mean anything to folks who aren't standards geeks.

I highly recommend doing this (if you are one of my competitors :).

I'd rather see naked people than naked websites.

Wow.

It translated the & lt; and & gt; into actual brackets instead of leaving the codes. Looked correct in the preview. ANYway, if you view the source of this page, find the above comment you will see the code i put in.

Or you will probably be seeing the result of the code if you are using Internet explorer :-P.

I think he says 48 hours because he's trying to consider time zones other than his own. Because it isn't midnight everywhere at the same time, a given date could be considered to last up to 48 hours in its march across the entire world.

Or something like that.

I'm with you. If they want to show off the power of web standards, then, how about something positive, like everyone come up with a new skin for that day. It would be like a personal CSS Zen Garden to show how using web standards makes site changes easier, for example.

And the only people who care will be the ones participating really. The avg joe who visits the page isn't going to care. They are just going to be disappointed the page is ugly.

I'm sure the explanitory text will be there - and will serve to do very little. I honestly don't see the point in this exercise. I think evano had the better suggestion - a csszengarden day where everyone switches out themes using just a new CSS file, and then a link to turn off the CSS. That, to me, would show the power of CSS and structured markup over a plain white page.

Yes, I have structuted semantic markup. And, as others have pointed out, the only people who will understand what they're looking at are the people already using structured semantic markup. Everyone else will see a "boring/ugly/broken" page (to their minds...)

lol is that a dare, or a double dare? cause it sounds like your daring folks to participate.

Oh, I get it alright. Here's the *reality* of what will happen:

Someone is bound to stop by one of the 450 sites and thing "WTF!?", then promptly leave. They may (or may not) see the "Annual Naked Day" link, but even if they do...they're VERY unlikely to click it. Unless of course they are a designer...again, preaching to the choir.

All of my layouts are semantically marked up. None use tables for layout. All are build with usability, accessibiliy, and validity in mind.

I will not be participating because I think it will do far more harm than good.

Don't you get it? ;)

Design is not about the designers. It's about the users.

But who said this has anything to do with designers?
And this is for the users, if you have semantic and structual markup your site will look just fine without css.

Ummm... Sean S said:

I hope users get frustrated for a day. Designers have been frustrated for years.

That's what I was replying to. And your assumption that the site will "look just fine" stripped to its bones of semantically and structurally marked content is to assume that the web is a purely informational resource for most users, rather than a blended visual and informational experience. If it is just informational, why bother with CSS at all?

I'm not sure how I can make this more clear...

I live in the real world, with real clients and real users. If they see a "naked" site, no matter how structurally sound, they will think it's either broken or ugly. Period. End of story. They will not understand the concept of web standards and semantic markup. They simply won't. We've been trying to educate them for YEARS, with far more effective attempts than this, and they still refuse to get it. If you try to explain the idea behind this "naked day" to them, here's what the majority of them will hear:

"So, you're saying that if the 'style sheet' gets broken or accidently deleted, my site will break and look like crap? No thanks. I want my site to look pretty *all* the time..."

The solution is to continue educating clients, one at a time, whether they realize it or not. I seldom *pitch* web standards. I just *do it*. The clients like what they see, not realizing the semantic markup and CSS behind it, *then* I tell them the benefits of the standards I used.

Taking it even further, we need to educate the so-called "educators" that are teaching "web design" at most schools. Have a look at the local high schools, community colleges. universities, and trade schools. The overwhelming majority of them are still teaching tables for layout, font tags, etc. Some of the more "advanced" classes are teaching 100% Flash sites, with no regard for how to make them usable or accessible. This is turning out a bunch of hack designers with no idea how to create a proper web site.

A friend of mine is taking a web design class at a community college. He's askef for my help a couple of times. He was struggling with a table, and I told him I could show him how to accomplish what he wanted much easier in CSS. He showed my the class handouts for that week, particularly the part where his instructor told them specifically NOT to use CSS, because "it's an unproven technology that doesn't work the same in all web browsers. Tables are the only way to assure a consistent look to your website." They're actually TEACHING this crap in the schools.

But back to topic of "naked day." I've worked with enough clients and users to know this will most certainly NOT have the intended affect on the layperson.

A friend of mine is taking a web design class at a community college. He's askef for my help a couple of times. He was struggling with a table, and I told him I could show him how to accomplish what he wanted much easier in CSS. He showed my the class handouts for that week, particularly the part where his instructor told them specifically NOT to use CSS, because "it's an unproven technology that doesn't work the same in all web browsers. Tables are the only way to assure a consistent look to your website." They're actually TEACHING this crap in the schools.

This isn't surprising, at all. There is a pretty serious ramp-up for mastering CSS layout and semantic markup. I think there is a large chunk of the designer/developer population who have honed their table skills to the point where they don't want to change, or are unwilling to invest the amount of time necessary to do it better.

The teacher at the commmunity college is probably just a freelance designer.

Also, at this point, most clients don't understand the benefits of using web standards, so there is virtually no pressure from clients to use them. This may change as more people start using browsers on handheld devices and more companies start taking the section 508 guidelines more seriously. We can only hope.

Taking it even further, we need to educate the so-called "educators" that are teaching "web design" at most schools.

This I agree with. We have GOT to stop teaching this crap in schools.

But I just don't understand why there's so much opposition to this Naked Day thing. It's a day, and it's harmless. Plus, even without their CSS, semantically-sound websites look better than half of the junk on the web.

And you might be right, evano, that design is not about designers, but web-design is. That's why I can charge more for my design than the college grads who're learning that "tables are the only way to assure a consistent look to your website". We're talking about communicating a standard here, not ugly vs. beautiful.

But I just don't understand why there's so much opposition to this Naked Day thing. It's a day, and it's harmless. Plus, even without their CSS, semantically-sound websites look better than half of the junk on the web.

But, it's not harmless. To the casual (layman) user, semantically-sound websites without their CSS are *not* better than half the junk on the web. You and I may look at the majority of MySpace pages and cringe. But users LOVE them. They love busy backgrounds that make the text unreadable. They love embedded MP3's that play automatically. They love crappy pages. Casual users just don't "get" semantically-sound websites. They want "bling". That's not to see we, as designers, need to *give* them bling. We need to educate them. But the "naked day" is NOT the way to educate. It will NOT accomplish that goal, and will most likely have the opposite affect.

The opposite affect? What, like, force everyone to ignore web standards more?

I wonder if part of your argument stems from your perspective of your own users. I know my own site's users are mostly tech-saavy, internet-aware people who, after seeing my naked site today might just be curious enough to research web standards and learn what they're all about.

The worst that could happen (for me) is that I'll lose my readership -- those that don't care about what I care about. So I'm not afraid of getting naked for a day. :)

You say your users are web-saavy. Well, the "naked day" isn't for them. It's for the non-saavy user (which is the majority of users.)

I'm not talking about the perspective of "my users"...sounds to me like that's what *you're* doing. No, I'm talking about users and clients from a wide variety of industries that I've dealt with. I don't just hae a personal site that I'm drawing conclusions from. As a web designer, I've worked with many different clients and users, conducted usability studies, etc.

Well, I should've also noted that of the several websites I maintain/oversee I only chose to strip one of its CSS: My personal site. I think it would've been foolish of me to do so to the others.

You think Naked Day is for the non-saavy? I don't agree. I think it's for the tech-saavy, but unaware. I think it's for those students learning poor web design from community colleges. I think it's for already-convinced but too-scared-to-implement designers. And I think it's for fellow web standards advocates, as a way of bonding and celebrating the medium.

The user of the site will generally not know why this event is being done and probably doesn't really care and just wants to view your site and get information.

But my information is still there, isn't it? Even when my presentation is broken, the content remains available, and easily read (unlike non-standards-based sites). That's the beauty of these standards, and that's what is being communicated.

There are better and less extreme ways to get your message across. This idea will do more harm than good.

I guess that's why I chose to participate in this: I like that it's extreme. Your idea of an additional link to more information on the subject is good, but probably not as impacting.

I think, as web developers/designers we need to stop fearing the user.

Sean, I've been advocating web standards for a long, long time. I know that it's the right way to do things, that it makes maintenance easier, that it joins the web as a semantic whole, and is both accessible and future-proof. I think that you, knowing the audience for your blog as a group who are interested and may be willing to learn from your example, are a good site to participate. In your case, you are actually thinking of your users (whether you want to or not :)) and how your demonstration will educate them. I know that many sites which don't have such a defined and open-minded audience will be doing their users and themselves a disservice. I think of it like black-and-white movies and black-and-white photography: people interested in the particular qualities of those media find in them a great deal of value and beauty, while the majority of people flip the channel or say, "don't you have any new pictures?"

Do you think Mike Davidson is being foolish by participating?

Like you, Mike probably knows his audience and knows that they're mostly sophisticated, web-savvy folks who will understand what he's doing and why. In both of your cases, it's not a foolish thing.

A couple things here:

1. By fearing lawsuits, Burger King could cripple their productivity. I hope you understand my point.
2. No one's arguing the importance of clean layouts and/or solid content. This is a one-day publicity stunt.
3. I'd be very careful about assumptions of users' behavior — especially on the web. Assuming they'll give up and "close the window" before seeing the "naked" message.

Wonderful, another case of a site having negative comments

Do people have to support the idea? No matter the idea your going to get detractors.

And just becuase 1000 people sign up for the idea doesn't necessarilly validate it as a good one. If the "nude" day actually does have a positive impact I'll be pleasantly suprised. Good luck with it.

finalcut,
He did add the emoticon to this comment, which I think to most people is an indication that he was not totally serious.

Dustin,
I truly appreciate your intentions, I just can't help thinking that there are better ways to get the point across.

sorry I didn't see the emoticon. Or at least If I did see it my mind just glazed over it.