Documentation might need updating?

I know this is from left-field, but I'm just picking up the manual on ngc and got confused in a way people who know it will not remember.

(As an aside, I find it super cool that LinuxCNC was a NIST project that now lives on its own. Super cool.)

The documentation for ngc programming appears to be here at:  linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gcode/overview.html#_format_of_a_line

Specifically, that link points to section 2: Format of a Line.

Trying to read ngc syntax for the first time, I'm particularly focused on this section.

(And by the way, this document is clearly ported and slightly updated from a NIST document from August 2000 found here .)

Line 3 under "Format of a Line" is what does the heavy lifting... but it is curiously missing "o-words"

A learning newb finds example ngc code, like say m6demo.ngc, and right up, it starts doing "o<m6demo> sub" and the newb goes to section 2, Format of a Line, line 3, then goes to the "words" table, and hey, hang on -- "o" (aka "O") isn't there. 

It doesn't show up until we get to section 3.2: Subroutine Parameters, where we only have the following line of text: "1-30 Subroutine local parameters of call arguments. These parameters are local to the subroutine. Volatile. See also the chapter on O-Codes . "

It seems pretty clear to me that o-codes were an extension added after 2000 (along with named parameters and axis UVW, and reading .ini and .hal parameters and other such goodness) but that the documentation above those add-ins was not updated...

This leaves your hard-reading sequential-newb-learner with unnecessary struggles.

If I were to make a pull request for updating this doc, would it be acceptable to make naming-convention recommendation for little "o" instead of capital "O" so that it's immediately clear when someone might copy a line by hand not to get that mixed up? (I raise my hand on that one.)