ok, reading illustro's responses, here's what i'm getting:
- RAW is about pedantic literal legalistic interpretation of text
- we don't skip from "here's what it literally says" to "here's what we infer this to mean, in a way that is different to what it literally says" unless we have a very good reason to do so, because RAW is generally more about examining the former. (a good reason is: "the text literally means this. however, that's patently absurd, and nobody uses it that way. we tend to take it to mean [other thing] instead.")