Among the textual measures, Katz and Bommarito (2013) suggest the use of <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">total text length</hi>, <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">average word length</hi>, <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">Shannon entropy of word use</hi>, <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">depth of the hierarchical structure</hi> and <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">density of external references</hi>. Höfler and Piotrowski (2011: 87) further consider the structural complexity by observing the <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">number of subunits per structural unit</hi> (e.g. paragraphs per article), down to <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">semantic units </hi>per sentence, separated by expressions like “whereby” or “with the exception of” etc. Palmirani and Cervone (2014) take a diachronic posture, and propose a comprehensive indicator of <hi xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" rend="italic">dynamic complexity</hi> based on the amount and the impact of consecutive amendments to an original law.