[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Well, I do all the bits and pieces up to the whole nine yards--typesetting,
copyediting, proofreading, book design and layout, etc., and I agree that,
while copyediting is much easier onscreen, there are some errors that are
much easier to see in hard copy. I used to do all copyediting on hard copy
for that reason, and because I wanted to add comments to the manuscript,
either in the margins or on Post-its, but of late I am mostly given an
electronic copy, so I usually edit with Track Changes enabled (if the client
insists) but in Final view so I'm not distracted by the markup and post my
comments to a separate commentary file.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA

"grammatim" wrote in message
...
On Mar 22, 6:03 pm, "Robert M. Franz (RMF)"
wrote:
Hello grammatim

grammatim wrote:
Double the opportunity for making mistakes, and considerably
lengthening the time taken! Ah, but if you're billing by the hour ...

how you _edit_ has nothing to do with how you send the document off to
the publisher.

I do most editing on-screen, but certain types of things you're much
more likely to spot on a physical printout compared to a screen, however
large and expensive. This applies to copy-editing, and
pagination/justification control, as well as estimation of a new
"layout" (read: template).

Those last items aren't part of a copyeditor's job, but a
typesetter's. A proofreader _might_ be asked to comment, but usually
the design department gets highly offended when the editorial
department dares to make a comment. (I've been doing this
professionally for 36 years.)