Nature Precedings forum: topic
This is a public forum
Suggestions in this forum: progress
Santosh Patnaik
Thursday, 17 January 2008 07:26 UTC
Nature Precedings is about to be half a year old. And it appears to have been successful in attracting submissions, 300 or so in this period.
A few suggestions have been put forth in this forum to further improve the publication. E.g., here and here and here. One wonders if and when atleast some of the suggestions would get implemented.
-
Replies
-
Thank you for the feedback! We consider all suggestions (and comments/criticism) seriously, and whenever possible, incorporate this into our development plan.
Other suggestions made in this forum and elsewhere include:
- Ability to browse by document type (e.g. just manuscripts, or just posters)
- Negative voting
- Add ratings for comments themselves
- Use open ID
- Link Precedings users to their Nature Network profiles
- Allow anonymous / pseudo-anonymous commenting
- Embedded (Flash?) viewer for documents
Plus the three above:
For readers here—which of these features are important to you? Are there other features not mentioned above that you would like to see?
(Santosh—Thanks so much for the suggestions and for following up on them. Egon, Ben, and Craig—thanks also for your comments on Santosh’s post about ratings.)
-
I do not think this suggestion is that important:
* Embedded (Flash?) viewer documents — it’s one format vs others (PDF [almost universally available] and Word)This suggestion can definitely facilitate literature access (and, hence, a critical appraisal):
* Citation extractionSuggestions for these are good, but these are issues related to interface/data access, and do not concern the primary objective of Nature Precedings:
* Ability to browse by document type (e.g. just manuscripts, or just posters) * Use open ID * Link Precedings users to their Nature Network profiles * Allow anonymous / pseudo-anonymous commenting (ideally, there is no ground for anonymity in scientific/academic criticism)This suggestion should be implemented as Nature Precedings is a publication:
* (appropriately) Watermarked (and dated) PDFsSuggestions concerning these are definitely very important:
* Negative voting * Add ratings for comments themselves (though this will be useful only if there are scores of comments; rated comments can help new readers quickly access the best appraisals) * Ratings system (an appropriate system will cover negative voting as well)
-