Liberals like to classify anyone who takes the bible more than allegorically true as literalists, but there is a whole spectrum. I couldn’t find a good description of these different approaches, maybe you can. Here is my somewhat tongue-in-cheek take on it:
1. Biblicist – sometimes called hyperliteralists, they take the bible literally, even when it should not be. They are very strict.
2. Contextual Literalist – someone who uses the principles of biblical hermeneuticsHermeneutics (/ˌhɜːrməˈnjuːtɪks/) is the theory and methodology of interpretation, especially the interpretation of biblical texts, wisdom literature, as well as philosophical texts. It involves considering the genre, historical context, authorial purpose (stated or implied), narrative and linguistic context, logic, and other rules for interpretation and application. More to "properly" interpret the bible. Most evangelicals fall into this group.
3. Convenient Literalists – those who only take the parts of the bible they like (morally agree with) or can believe (some don’t believe in miracles).
4. Higher Critics – those who spend most of their time trying to desconstruct the bible, examining it from a purely intellectual and scientific viewpoint. Some of this work is helpful in understanding the scriptures, but much of this work ends up udermining the bible’s credibility by questioning its reliability, authorship, and content.
5. Allegoricalists – those whose hermeneutical and homiletic credo might be "the bible stories are meant to be used as morality allegories, not as literal stories."
6. Fairy Taleists – those who look at the bible as a bunch of made up stories to keep people in bondage to religion.