NNNN. Title stating the decision as a fact

• Status: Proposed
• Discussion:

Context

What problem are we solving, and what forces are in tension? W3C spec language, user expectations, existing behavior that differs between bindings, implementation constraints. Link prior discussions (issues, TLC notes) here as background — but summarize them, since this section must make sense without following any links.

Binding	Current behavior
Java
Python
Ruby
.NET
JavaScript

Decision

The decision, stated in language-neutral terms. This is the normative part: what every binding MUST do, and what is explicitly left to per-language idiom. Record what and why, not how — implementation lives in the adopting PRs. Use code sketches only to pin down the API shape being decided, not to specify implementation.

Considered options

• Option A — what it is; why it was rejected or accepted
• Option B — what it is; why it was rejected or accepted

Consequences

What gets easier, what gets harder, what users will notice. Deprecations triggered by this decision and their timelines. Follow-up decisions this one makes necessary.

Appendix (optional)

Durable supporting material the decision relies on: benchmarks, spec excerpts, survey of behavior in other tools. Delete this section if there is none — ephemeral evidence belongs in the PR thread instead.