First, to Jean:

My first reaction is: ask the editor how they would like to be involved.
They may have a preference.

Second, I am concerned that you don’t seem to have anybody keeping an eye
on readability and relevance.  (Perhaps you do, and it wasn't mentioned.)
This is as important, if not more important, than content.  The greatest
content in the world won’t do you any good if nobody can read or understand
it.

Given the way you describe the process, my instinct would be to make the
labels as final as possible before going to the editor.  What happens if
the labels come back, are reviewed and tested, and require further re-
writing and re-editing?  Seems cumbersome.  Do all the reviewing and
testing, and hand it all to the editor at once.

Also, the curator seems to be the "point-person" on the labels.
(Personally I feel that function is best performed by a writer, but that's
another discussion.)  As authors, they would be the ones who know what each
label is trying to accomplish, how the labels work together, and how any
suggested changes (in either content or form) might affect that.  The point-
person/primary writer MUST be involved at EVERY step of the process.

As for curatorial involvement, I believe it is essential for the expert to
sign off on content (though not on form, unless they have an advanced
degree in communications).  Therefore, the curator must review everything
that goes out to the editor (no sense in the editor working on copy that
contains errors), AND the curator needs to review everything that comes
back (even minor revision can alter subtle shades of meaning).  If a second
round of editing is required, it is best for the curator and editor to sit
down together, or at least on the phone, and go through the issues to reach
a common understanding.

To Dave, David, and Nancy:

Good advice, all.  Though I'm not entirely sold on the idea that more
eyeballs is always better.  There is the "too many cooks" problem -- labels
by committee are rarely engaging.  And there's the fact that you can't
possibly take everyone's suggestions, which will lead some reviewers to
feel you are wasting their time.  Have enough reviewers that you're
covering all the bases, but not so many that the process becomes unwieldy.
Also, any reviewers who are not part of the exhibit team should know they
are acting in an advisory capacity only.  (I can't tell you how many times
I've had to stop and bring somebody up to speed on why we're covering one
topic and not another.)

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).