W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: Reading level and metadata

From: Anne Pemberton <apembert@crosslink.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 14:31:26 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: dd@w3.org
Cc: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Hello all,

	This is my first post to this list, but felt I could answer the following

At 05:36 PM 6/22/1999 +0200, Daniel Dardailler wrote:
>First, can we come up with an objective rating system, vs a subjective
>one, in the area of readability ?
>An objective system is one that can be used reliabily by different
>persons and still give the same answer: e.g. I look at a page, I
>looked at the definition of reading level 0 to 4, and I say, this one
>is a 3, and so would anyone with the understanding of the definitions.

Objective rating system exists; text is measured in "grade levels" for
readability. It's even possible to rate your own writing when you run the
spell and grammar checker when you are finished writing. Both Word Perfect
and Word 97 offer the option for Readability Statistics to be included with
the spelling and grammar check. 

This site, found by looking up readability test in alta-vista, seems to be
helping folks in the medical field do reradable documents:


The page tells you how to use either Word Perfect or Word to determine the
readability of a document, and suggests that you use a readability level
less than 10.0 in medical office documents (with a caveat to limit medical
jargon) so that patients with less than an PHD can understand what they are

And pages with a little advice on increasing readability of text at:



Hope this is some help in understanding that the task is do-able.

			Anne Pemberton

Anne L. Pemberton
Enabling Support Foundation
Received on Tuesday, 22 June 1999 14:23:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:29 UTC