The most important challenge facing publication-related Web sites—and still the most difficult one—is transcending their print roots.

We’re not talking about simply repackaging the static text and graphics from a magazine or newspaper into a Web-friendly form. Naturally, print-derived content should be presented so Web audiences can scan it, easily navigate through it, e-mail copies to friends, print it out, and flexibly search archives. But these days, that’s like saying a car really should include tires and a steering wheel.

Enter the Transcendent 10. This is the first in a series of postings in which we’ll feature 10 publishers who are extending the “brand DNA” of their publications onto the Web in impressive ways. These savvy folks have considered the special powers of the Web (interactivity, data bases, always-on accessibility, quick turnaround time, multimedia, social networking…) and answered this question creatively:

What information/activity/service/mode of communication or participation would the Web allow us to offer our readers–stuff they’d kill to get–that we could never offer them in a print medium?

Nature.com
Nature.com, the first of our Transcendent 10, is the online extension of the prestigious scientific journal Nature and its cousins in the London-based Nature Publishing Group. This is a huge effort. If we tried describing it all, there would barely be anything left for the remaining nine “Transcendents” to demonstrate. So here’s a rundown of some of Nature.com’s most interesting elements…

Niche-specific tagging network: A tagging network enables users to bookmark the location of Web pages that interest them, to assign their own descriptive “tags” (labels or keywords) to these saved pages, to share tagged items with members of the network, and to explore the tagged pages of others. One of the most popular tagging networks is “del.icio.us.” Increasingly, online publishers are inserting “Add to del.icio.us” links in their articles in order to make it easy for users to save, tag, and share–and thereby promote–their content. (Note the
del.icio.us links at the end of all our blog postings.)

Nature.com recognized that tagging would be a great service for busy researchers, who need all the help they can get in organizing, keeping tabs on, and referring colleagues to the latest studies and other scientific news online. But rather than tie into del.icio.us, the publishers of Nature.com created their own, private-label tagging network called Connotea (great idea, not-so-snappy name).

Connotea has two key advantages over a service such as del.icio.us:

Advantage #1: Connotea’s taggers make up a specialized community.
Because the service is associated with the Nature group’s publications, Connotea appears to attract users working in and interested in serious science. They have considerable expertise in this niche, which makes the articles they tag, and even the tags they invent, a valuable resource to fellow members of the research-minded community. A quick visit to the Connotea “cloud tag” gives researchers a snapshot of what their colleagues consider important and
interesting.

This is a nice variation on the Web 2.0-ish goal of drawing on “the wisdom of the crowd.” In this case, it’s not the great unwashed Web audience, but a more qualified crowd of insiders clustered around the publisher’s territory of coverage.

Advantage #2: Unlike the bare-bones, generic features offered by Web-wide tagging networks such as del.icio.us, Connotea’s tagging tools are custom-made to serve the needs of researchers. Along with saving Web addresses, for example, Connotea automatically captures
bibliographic information and other specialized metadata associated with academic papers and technical publications.

As a combination virtual library and professional networking tool, Connotea is a service of great potential value to Nature’s audience–and this is something that could never be done within the
pages of a print publication. By the way, Connotea also carries the Nature.com brand name, thereby promoting the franchise and positioning the site as the online place to be for scientists.

Niche-specific article recommendations network: While they were at it, the publishers of Nature.com also created their own version of a news “recommendation network.” The concept is based on Digg, a Web-wide service that allows its users to nominate and vote for (“digg”) or vote against (“bury”) Web-based news articles, primarily in the field of technology. Nature’s Dissect Medicine is a site that enables users to suggest and rank medical news articles. The most popular articles are featured prominently, as are those members of the network who have the sharpest eyes for news of high interest.

As with the Connotea tagging network, much of Dissect Medicine focuses on material that does not originate within the pages of the Nature Publishing Group. But it taps into the collective opinions of Nature’s readers and like-minded audience members on a daily basis, creating a unique resource online that just can’t be done in print.

User contributions to complement the publisher’s content: In print, Nature Publishing has an impressive compendium of “recipes for researchers,” known more formally as “protocols.” These are
expert-reviewed, officially sanctioned, step-by-step procedures for conducting many different kinds of experiments. In addition to pouring these official protocols into a database and making them easy to search online, the publishers of Nature.com recently invited users to contribute their own favorite recipes in a wiki-like setup called the Protocols Network. They also have invited everyone to comment on and propose improvements to those submissions.

The hoped-for result (one which a static print publication could never pull off): a self-propagating, self-editing resource of voluntary yet expert advice that blossoms alongside the more official wisdom about how to do things right in the lab.

Open peer review online: In a similar but more radical experiment, Nature.com has invited its online audience to try out an “open source” variation on the time-honored–almost sacred–process of “peer review.” This is the routine by which a carefully selected panel of scientific authorities judges the merit of research papers that have been submitted for publication.

In the peer review trial, at the same time that submissions are being scrutinized in private by the publisher’s hand-picked experts, anyone in the Nature.com audience can have his or her say, too. In another wiki-like environment, volunteers are encouraged to step forward, present their credentials, and evaluate the proposed research report in public. The trial is scheduled to end this fall, after which Nature’s editors will analyze the user-generated peer review, compare it to the results of the more conventional approval process, and share their reactions.

It’s a remarkable example of a publication inviting its readers to help improve the fundamental methods of publishing and even the publication itself.

Local social networks: In addition to the global community it is building, Nature.com is dabbling in social networking at a local level. Nature Network Boston is the online meeting place for those journal readers and other researchers with real-world addresses in and around Boston. The site lists local scientific gatherings, presents Boston-area research news, encourages members to create discussion groups in narrow interest areas, and invites users to publish blogs for free.

Nature Network Boston wasn’t exactly a hive of activity the last time we checked. But you’ve got to admire this publishing group for investigating so many different ways to extend its brand and serve its audience online. We encourage you to spend some time exploring these and all the other features we didn’t have space to mention (start your tour at Nature.com and Nature Launch Pad).

Do you see anything among Nature.com’s efforts that could inspire a new online strategy for your own publication?

Are there any sites that you consider impressive enough to be among the Transcendent 10?