When an edit I make gets rolled back by the owner of the post, I almost always completely ignore it, however many times my edit is rolled back by a moderator accompanied by an explanation in a comment about why edits having spelling corrections, retagging or formatting improvements should not be rolled back except for a legitimate reason.
When an edit I make gets overturned by the owner of the post with a request to ignore the post until the OP has finished editing it, I apologize for being intrusive and then ignore the post as requested. If an edit request as made by the OP in a comment, I will edit the post myself as the OP requested rather than allowing the post to be defined by only a comment which many people do not read.
I make an exception for correcting rudeness or vandalism in edits. For example someone who posted an answer may edit the original question with an edit like "All the other answers to this question are wrong, so upvote my answer.", but when I removed the disrespectful edit my edit was rolled back. In a case like this I will rollback the disrespectful edit again and again, which has the effect of getting all the rollbacks flagged for moderator attention.
In general I try to handle as much of my own editorial work as I can myself without flagging anything, in order to avoid burdening the moderators with unnecessary janitorial work.