Tools & workflow
The manuscript after export
Treat export as a conversion that needs its own inspection, especially when the next person uses different software.
Use one proof as the shared reference
PDF comments work well when reviewers need to discuss a fixed page layout. The advantage disappears if several visually similar proofs circulate without clear version names. Identify the file being reviewed and keep its page order unchanged during that round.
Tell reviewers what kind of feedback is needed. A proofing pass may focus on errors, layout and the implementation of previous corrections rather than broad rewriting. If substantive changes are still welcome, state that explicitly. The reviewer should not have to infer the stage from the appearance of the pages.
Attach the comment to the affected text
Use text selection and the appropriate comment or replacement tool when possible. A note floating near a paragraph can be ambiguous after the page is enlarged or viewed on another device. Anchor it to the exact word, line or object and explain the requested action.
Write replacement wording in full where it is short enough to be unambiguous. “Change the date to 14 June” is easier to implement than “date wrong.” If the issue is uncertain, phrase it as a query and identify the source or decision needed. Keep correction and question distinct.
For layout issues, describe the visible problem and its location. “The caption appears to belong to the image above, but it describes the image below” explains more than “move this.” A screenshot can help with an unusual rendering issue, but the comment should still identify the relevant page and element.
Keep discussion and resolution visible
Reply within the relevant comment thread so the decision remains attached to the issue. Avoid resolving a comment before the correction has been checked. A status such as resolved is a workflow signal; agree what it means to the people using the file.
Adobe's comment-management tools support reviewing and filtering comments. Use such features to find unresolved issues, but do not assume the absence of a visible comment means it was correctly implemented. Filters can hide material, and a status can be changed without altering the underlying page.
If several reviewers contribute, consolidate their comments into a controlled review process. Resolve contradictions before sending instructions to the person making corrections. Keep the original reviewed proof so a later question can be traced to the actual page that prompted it.
Verify in the next proof
After corrections, compare each resolved issue with the new PDF and inspect surrounding text for reflow or new spacing problems. A replacement word can change a line ending; a moved image can affect its caption. The new proof deserves its own version identifier.
Before final delivery, confirm whether comments should remain in the file. A production PDF and a review PDF serve different purposes. Preserve the annotated version in the project record while supplying the agreed clean output. The conversation is complete when the intended correction is visible in the final page, not merely when a comment thread has been closed.
