How should formatting errors be correctly indicated in the review?

[Inga_s Book Corner]

How should formatting issues (such as indentation errors, and scattered page numbers between lines of text) be correctly indicated in a review?

Initially, I listed them as grammar and spelling errors and mentioned them in the review. I received a response from the editor:
“The errors you listed are formatting issues that has nothing to do with grammar or spelling. It was okay to talk about it in the review. However, presenting them as a objective errors was against the guidelines.”

Last time, I indicated that there were 0 grammar and spelling errors. However, in the review, I mentioned formatting issues:
“I would rate The Pursuit of Happiness 4 out of 5 stars. I found no errors in the well-edited book, but it does have formatting issues. The version of the book I have contains errors with indentations and scattered page numbers between lines of text. This affects the flow of the text and the book’s visual presentation.

I received a response from the editor:
“You stated in the PRQ that the book contains zero errors but wrote in your review that the book contains errors. This is a breach of the guidelines.”

[Shirley Ann Riddern Labzentis]

Hi! I will try to answer your question. First of all, in your first review, the editor said, " However, presenting them as a objective errors was against the guidelines.” I have re-read the guidelines in case they added a new addendum that I was not aware of. No, they did not. So, in my opinion, the editor was wrong. It was not a breach of the guidelines, and you could ask for a recheck. The second review was a breach of the guidelines, as you stated that there were no errors, yet you noted in the PRQ that there were formatting problems. What I have always done, and I have over 95 reviews under my belt, I note in my review that there were formatting errors, and then after I have listed the regular grammar errors or typos, I note the formatting errors but state that these are unaccounted errors. If there were no other accountable errors, then I would still note in the box that there were unaccounted formatting errors. I hope that this helps. I know that it is a little confusing at first to know what to count and what not to count. I used to list every missed comma in the book, but now, I don't even mention them as the editor can say that it is an Oxford comma and is optional.

[Blueberry Dragon]

Thank you for the clarification @Shirley Ann Riddern Labzentis. That's quite useful information to have.

[Inga_s Book Corner]

Hi! I will try to answer your question. First of all, in your first review, the editor said, " However, presenting them as a objective errors was against the guidelines.” I have re-read the guidelines in case they added a new addendum that I was not aware of. No, they did not. So, in my opinion, the editor was wrong. It was not a breach of the guidelines, and you could ask for a recheck. The second review was a breach of the guidelines, as you stated that there were no errors, yet you noted in the PRQ that there were formatting problems. What I have always done, and I have over 95 reviews under my belt, I note in my review that there were formatting errors, and then after I have listed the regular grammar errors or typos, I note the formatting errors but state that these are unaccounted errors. If there were no other accountable errors, then I would still note in the box that there were unaccounted formatting errors. I hope that this helps. I know that it is a little confusing at first to know what to count and what not to count. I used to list every missed comma in the book, but now, I don't even mention them as the editor can say that it is an Oxford comma and is optional.

Thank you very much for the response and explanations!