just a quick comment: the paper doesn’t give a definition of reading, let alone an attainment based definition. The whole premise of the paper is that typical cases are typical *along all three dimensions* and that all three matter, but that different fields give different weight to each of these dimensions in ways that make sense, given their constraints and goals.
What you are reading as an “attainment based definition” of reading is simply part of the exposition of what the attainment definition *is*, alongside what the task and means dimension are.
hope that clarifies things!
