A hypothetical case may involve a general expression, a specific report, a proposed extra condition and a customary use of a term. None should be declared decisive before their relationships are examined.
First: wording — general or specific, unqualified or qualified, literal or figurative?
Second: establishment — how is each proof transmitted and with what authority?
Third: relationship — is the later evidence clarification, specification, qualification or real conflict?
Fourth: application — are the cause, condition, time and absence of impediment established?
A quantity expressly fixed by a text cannot simply be increased through a convenient analogy. Allusive wording requires a different inquiry into intention and context.
In this sequence, otherwise separate chapters become a coherent method of legal reasoning.