docs(adr): ADR 005 cites ADR 007 as merged via #210 and #326 as a proposed amendment (improvise-l2b8)

Codex P2 on 66f317e1: #326 is open, revision 9 is not accepted.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01VdfEGXA7aJ6ftMsCc9PJze

context/adr/005-exact-decimal-arithmetic.md

@@ -1821,7 +1821,9 @@ Added in revision 7. This lists what the three ADRs written since ask of this on
 read at their heads, and **changes none of the user's decisions** here. Each ADR is
 cited at the head named, and none was built or run.
 
-**ADR 007 (stable identities, accepted; merged, #326).**
+**ADR 007 (stable identities, accepted at revision 8; merged via #210).** The points
+below are read from revision 8, as on `gh/main`. Revision 9 is **not** part of it: see
+the last bullet.
 - **The version literal.** ADR 007 clause 10 adds a second `.improv` literal and says
   its exact spelling is left to the implementation. This ADR shares it (clause 10,
   question 5), so `#i` and `n/d` ride on the same bump. ADR 007 says nothing about
@@ -1837,6 +1839,13 @@ cited at the head named, and none was built or run.
   number spellings are unaffected; any clause here that quotes a category or item by
   name should be read as "by display name" once ADR 007 lands. Not re-read clause by
   clause.
+- **Revision 9 is a proposed amendment, not accepted** (PR #326, open, head `068e4130`;
+  it needs the user's explicit approval, and its Q23–Q25 are open). Nothing in this ADR
+  depends on it. It touches this ADR only at the edges: answers 33 and 34 (a typed name
+  matches ids first, then displays; whitespace in a slug) bear on how a name in formula
+  text is resolved, and answers 35 and 36 reopen Q23 (whether a measure or formula target
+  has an id and a display of its own), which would change what "a formula target" means
+  where this ADR names one. Read as a proposal, and re-check this ADR if #326 lands.
 
 **ADR 008 (virtualized grid, PR #308, proposed).** Its Q28 answer, "bigint is fine, we
 don't need to reinvent integers > safe size", makes a grid position a bigint above 2^53