diff --git a/text/0982-dst-coercion.md b/text/0982-dst-coercion.md
index c4263fd28b8..98d32fadeb5 100644
--- a/text/0982-dst-coercion.md
+++ b/text/0982-dst-coercion.md
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ in the `Target` type. Assuming `Fs` is the type of a field in `Self` and `Ft` is
 the type of the corresponding field in `Target`, then either `Ft <: Fs` or
 `Fs: CoerceUnsized<Ft>` (note that this includes some built-in coercions, coercions
 unrelated to unsizing are excluded, these could probably be added later, if needed).
-* There must be only one field that is coerced.
+* There must be only one non-PhantomData field that is coerced.
 * We record for each impl, the index of the field in the `Self` type which is
 coerced.
 
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ is auto-deref'ed, but not autoref'ed.
 ### On encountering an adjustment (translation phase)
 
 * In trans (which is post-monomorphisation) we should always be able to find an
-impl for any `CoerceUnsized` bound. 
+impl for any `CoerceUnsized` bound.
 * If the impl is for a built-in pointer type, then we use the current coercion
 code for the various pointer kinds (`Box<T>` has different behaviour than `&` and
 `*` pointers).
@@ -175,4 +175,14 @@ indicate the field type which is coerced, for example).
 
 # Unresolved questions
 
-None
+It is unclear to what extent DST coercions should support multiple fields that
+refer to the same type parameter. `PhantomData<T>` should definitely be
+supported as an "extra" field that's skipped, but can all zero-sized fields
+be skipped? Are there cases where this would enable by-passing the abstractions
+that make some API safe?
+
+# Updates since being accepted
+
+Since it was accepted, the RFC has been updated as follows:
+
+1. `CoerceUnsized` was specified to ingore PhantomData fields.