Recommend two structures for organizing alternatives considered.

index.bs

@@ -152,7 +152,41 @@ If your proposed design depends on other non-consensus features, list them.
 As your design evolves, keep track of and make a note of alternatives which have been considered.
 Explain what makes them worse for the web than your primary proposal.
 
-You undoubtedly had reasons not to choose those alternatives, but reviewers and other stakeholders may not have that context. Avoid redundant "what about [already-ruled out alternative]" type questions by explaining why those alternatives were ruled out.
+You undoubtedly had reasons not to choose those alternatives,
+but reviewers and other stakeholders may not have that context.
+Avoid redundant "what about [already-ruled out alternative]" type questions by explaining why those alternatives were ruled out.
+
+Format the alternatives in a way that makes them easy to understand.
+There are a few ways to do this.
+First, you can structure the alternative as:
+
+```markdown
+### Name of the alternative
+
+Explanation of the alternative design.
+
+#### Advantages
+
+* List
+
+#### Disadvantages
+
+* List
+
+#### Reason for rejection
+
+Why do you feel the disadvantages outweigh the advantages?
+```
+
+Alternatively, you can collect a set of [Architectural Decision Records](https://adr.github.io/) as files in your repository.
+[https://adr.github.io/madr/](https://adr.github.io/madr/#overview) may contain a good template,
+but we don't have enough experience to recommend this structure in particular.
+If you have a directory of ADRs, link them from this section of your explainer.
+
+Occasionally, an alternative will be clearly unacceptable for some reason,
+for example because it's strictly worse than another alternative that is analyzed in detail in another section.
+In that case, if you're sure the reviewers will agree,
+you can skip the sub-sections and describe just the reason for rejection.
 
 ## Connect to History ## {#history}
 

template.md

@@ -85,18 +85,41 @@ group), list them here.]
 ## Alternatives considered
 
 [This should include as many alternatives as you can,
-from high level architectural decisions down to alternative naming choices.]
+from high level architectural decisions down to alternative naming choices.
+If you capture your alternatives as Architectural Decision Records,
+use this section to link to the ADRs.]
 
 ### [Alternative 1]
 
-[Describe an alternative which was considered,
-and why you decided against it.
+[Describe an alternative which was considered.
 This alternative may have been part of a prior proposal in the same area,
 or it may be new.
-If you did any research in making this decision, discuss it here.]
+If you did any research in evaluating this alternative, discuss it here.]
+
+#### Pros
+
+* [List]
+
+#### Cons
+
+* [List]
+
+#### Reason for rejection
+
+[Why do you feel the cons outweigh the pros?]
 
 ### [Alternative 2]
 
+#### Pros
+
+* [List]
+
+#### Cons
+
+* [List]
+
+#### Reason for rejection
+
 [You may not have decided about some alternatives.
 Describe them as open questions here, and adjust the description once you make a decision.]