NNNN. Title stating the decision as a fact

  • Status: Proposed
  • Date: YYYY-MM-DD
  • 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.

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. Use code sketches per language here if the API shape is part of what's being decided.

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.

Binding status

BindingStatusNotes / tracking link
Javapending
Pythonpending
Rubypending
.NETpending
JavaScriptpending

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.