Well, the treaty is as it is now.  But for me the accessibility of it makes me think about the incoming Single Equalities Act for the UK and a comment that was made to me about how such a piece of legislation needs to be clear enough so that people will know what their rights are from it.  You can't do that with equality legislation as it exists.  I'm an accredited discrimination law advisor but still, it's horrendous trying to navigate everything.

But with this new Act, there is a certain purpose to it. Within it there are different themes each with a purpose and an implication. Behind that is the legal text.  If the purpose can be agreed, then the legal speak is written to serve that purpose, without it getting lost along the way.
I doubt that the Act will be written accessibly, but why can't there be a front layer with a clear purpose that sums up what the legal clauses under that section mean, to each country, to the EU?

To need to have the previous treaties to read alongside the new one in order to understand it, doesn't suggest clarity in any way to me.  I'm trying not to be ignorant of the fact that with that many members states and with so many different and often conflicting demands, that the process then beomes hugely complex - but if only the people directly involved with it or those who have legal expertise have a hope in hell of understanding the meaning, then I'm not convinced.

Ad astra per aspera