diff --git a/xml/issue3976.xml b/xml/issue3976.xml
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..799d7b2bd3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xml/issue3976.xml
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+
+
+
+
+What does it mean for a type to be "allocator aware"?
+
+Alisdair Meredith
+14 Aug 2023
+99
+
+
+
+Trying to interpret the specification for allocator-aware containers, .
+
+P1 establishes that std::array is not an allocator-aware container, but all other containers in
+the standard are.
+
+P2 then adds vocabulary, with ruling that if a container type X is not allocator-aware then
+the specification is as-if the allocator were std::allocator<T>. I cannot find a specification
+for allocator-aware, and do not believe we should treat this as a recursive definition, as
+the only standard container that would be affected would be std::array, which absolutely
+does not want to apply all the terms in this subclause.
+
+It looks like we might mean types that do not have everything specified by the first
+sentence, such as an allocator_type member. Perhaps we want to say a container
+type X is allocator-aware using allocator A if […], and then that basic_string and
+containers that are not otherwise allocator aware are are treated as-if they were
+allocator-aware using std::allocator<typename X::value_type> (where value_type
+is already guaranteed to exist by the basic container requirements).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+