Re: [gnso-osc-ccc] CCT Report II

[Scott Pinzon <scott.pinzon@xxxxxxxxx>]

Upon re-reading the document, I see multiple recommendations for the GNSO to 
use “clear English” and plain English. I agree with that (certainly!) but I 
wonder if we could also introduce an objective standard. The document 
essentially encourages the GNSO to do better, which is quite vague. An 
objective standard of some sort would provide a means to measure what the 
definition of “better” is.

I think Word is nearly ubiquitous in the GNSO, and the Word Spelling/Grammar 
checker has an option you can enable that checks the document and returns 
readability statistics. (Found here: Tools ==> Spelling and Grammar ==> Options 
==> Show readability statistics)

Would the group be in favor of language that recommended each document should 
be checked for readability by its author, and should be edited to return a 
Flesch-Kincaid readability level at a certain grade or lower? (This CCT 
document comes in at a 12th grade reading level. In case “grade” does not have 
the same meaning internationally, it is saying the reader needs the 
understanding of an 18-year-old native English speaker to understand the 
document.)

Just a suggestion, which perhaps you will discuss on the call today.

Best Regards,
Scott Pinzon
Director, Policy Communications
ICANN


On 2/20/10 5:22 PM, "Mason Cole" <masonc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

CCT Members:

As promised in my earlier communication, this email transmits the latest 
version of Report II-Communications & Coordination.  As you will see, there are 
many remaining edits and comments that we need to discuss.

I have asked our GNSO Secretariat to find a date/time next week that will work 
on the GNSO calendar and, hopefully, with your schedules.  A Doodle poll 
announcement will be mailed to the CCT list, so please be on the lookout for it 
and respond as soon as you are able.

Once we have completed our work on Report II, this team’s activities should be 
completed.  I ask for your commitment and participation a few more weeks as we 
put the finishing touches on this final portion of our recommendations.

I am hoping that Liz Gasster from the Policy Staff will be able to attend our 
next session since she made some excellent contributions to this latest version.

If you have any questions, please let me know; otherwise, I look forward to 
working with you again next week.

Regards,

Mason Cole



-- sp
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
Scott Pinzon, CISSP
Director, Policy Communications
ICANN

+1 (310) 279 2655