Re: [docbook] Re: Markup suggestions please?

[davep <davep@dpawson.co.uk>]

On 12/07/2011 10:14 PM, Norman Walsh wrote:
> davep<davep@dpawson.co.uk>  writes:
> > What about markup for an assembly level instruction?
> >
> > <instr proc='ARM'>vadd</
> >    Suggest anything to improve on that?
> Do 'token' or 'symbol' seem plausible?
Closer than function.
   symbol? No semantic inference of action as per instruction?
   made me think of the linker symbol table?
   token?
The <token>mov</token> instruction?
Meh? I think is the appropriate response I've heard :-)

<instr>move</   is simple and clear.... and one more, is
that the problem?
Then (to fill the picture) what of the operands?
add r1,r1,[r2,lsl #4]!
  Pandora's box?

regards


> regards
>
> --
> Dave Pawson
> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> http://www.dpawson.co.uk