Fair enough no need to quarrel over this slight difference of opinion. Now, by all means don't take this as any kind of criticism or attack! As far as I know, you are a practicing trial lawyer. Me on the other hand, my work is journalistic in nature and in addition, I work in diplomacy.
I suppose that your job has trained you to preferably be very precise with words, to look at their absolute meaning. If so, law texts are more about exegesis, not "feelings of nuances". Mine is all about nuances and reading between lines.
Could we agree that we approach texts from different directions? Both approaches absolutely valid and maybe, it is only a very much broader context that might make one more fitting than the other? But neither of them wrong per se?
In any case, thank you for the exchange! I always appreciate your input, because even if I don't agree, it is intelligent and gives at least food for thought.