When we do a book, there is no position called "Peer Reviewer". The only title it Technical Editor. Therefore, that person has to wear both hats...

Often times, Technical Editors find that they end up doing more Copy Editing roles. That is what copy editor is for...


>Is there a purpose for good tech editors and peer reviewers being seperate people? Yes, I think a case can be made for that. For example, tech editors generally make less money then the authors or researchers (who would make up the peer review poo). Authors and researchers generally don't have the time to devote to technical editing.
>
>JMO. I've had the extreme pleasure (and pain *g*) of working with a full fledged technical editor on a manual. It was a great experience. Course, it was an ego-bruising experience, too. :)