A finished reading copy needs review without accidental changes to the original text. A view-only link can help, but it addresses only the editing question. You must also establish which version is being reviewed, how feedback will arrive, and who should be able to open the content.
Identify the review version
Give the copy a recognizable state, such as a date and version identifier. If the document changes continually during review, comments may refer to different content. For formal approval, a fixed review version may therefore be more useful than a constantly evolving working draft.
Describe the review scope. Should the recipient check facts, assess wording, or approve publication? A general “Please take a look” often produces feedback that misses the actual question. Identify especially relevant sections when useful, without removing context needed to evaluate them properly.
Set reading rights and audience separately
Choose a role that permits the intended reading. A view-only link can still be accessible to too many people. Inspect link availability as well as the editing role. Existing access through folders or groups may remain in effect and should be considered in the access overview.
Viewing does not automatically prevent copying, photographing, or otherwise redistributing the information. Some applications provide additional restrictions whose limits need checking in that product. Share only material suitable for the intended recipients. A single checkbox does not replace that judgment or guarantee complete control after disclosure.
Provide a usable feedback route
If the view does not permit comments, explicitly name another method. Reviewers might submit a page number and short text reference to a shared issue list. If comments are desired, consider whether a commenting role is more appropriate. Do not request actions that the granted permissions make impossible.
Test the link and agree when the review should finish. Collect results in one location and identify resolved items. After completion, remove unnecessary access or replace the review link with the approved version. This leaves a traceable distinction between the draft that was examined and the final document, instead of a collection of links whose status is unclear months later.