[rfc-i] [Tools-discuss] Recommendation 9 from Results and analysis of the survey of I-D authors on formats and tools
mcr+ietf at sandelman.ca
Sat Feb 6 18:07:37 PST 2021
Tim Wicinski <tjw.ietf at gmail.com> wrote:
> mmark is much more flexible on what one can include.
That actually is less helpful, if you haven't uploaded all the required files
to the DT.
The CELLAR WG, of which I'm co-chair, uses mmark, btw.
Our use is probably overly complicated, but I didn't set it up :-)
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF at sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 487 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the rfc-interest