diff --git a/active-rfcs/0000-new-slot-syntax.md b/active-rfcs/0000-new-slot-syntax.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..49471d9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/active-rfcs/0000-new-slot-syntax.md
@@ -0,0 +1,338 @@
+- Start Date: 2019-01-14
+- Target Major Version: 2.x & 3.x
+- Reference Issues: https://github.com/vuejs/vue/issues/7740, https://github.com/vuejs/vue/issues/9180, https://github.com/vuejs/vue/issues/9306
+- Implementation PR: (leave this empty)
+
+# Summary
+
+Introducing a new syntax for scoped slots usage:
+
+- New directive `v-slot` that unifies `slot` and `slot-scope` in a single directive syntax.
+
+- Shorthand for `v-slot` that can potentially unify the usage of both scoped and normal slots.
+
+# Basic example
+
+Using `v-slot` to declare the props passed to the scoped slots of `<foo>`:
+
+``` html
+<!-- default slot -->
+<foo v-slot="{ msg }">
+  {{ msg }}
+</foo>
+
+<!-- named slot -->
+<foo>
+  <template v-slot:one="{ msg }">
+    {{ msg }}
+  </template>
+</foo>
+```
+
+# Motivation
+
+When we first introduced scoped slots, it was verbose because it required always using `<template slot-scope>`:
+
+``` html
+<foo>
+  <template slot-scope="{ msg }">
+    <div>{{ msg }}</div>
+  </template>
+</foo>
+```
+
+To make it less verbose, in 2.5 we introduced the ability to use `slot-scope` directly on the slot element:
+
+``` html
+<foo>
+  <div slot-scope="{ msg }">
+    {{ msg }}
+  </div>
+</foo>
+```
+
+This means it works on component as slot as well:
+
+``` html
+<foo>
+  <bar slot-scope="{ msg }">
+    {{ msg }}
+  </bar>
+</foo>
+```
+
+However, the above usage leads to a problem: the placement of `slot-scope` doesn't always clearly reflect which component is actually providing the scope variable. Here `slot-scope` is placed on the `<bar>` component, but it's actually defining a scope variable provided by the default slot of `<foo>`.
+
+This gets worse as the nesting deepens:
+
+``` html
+<foo>
+  <bar slot-scope="foo">
+    <baz slot-scope="bar">
+      <div slot-scope="baz">
+        {{ foo }} {{ bar }} {{ baz }}
+      </div>
+    </baz>
+  </bar>
+</foo>
+```
+
+It's not immediately clear which component is providing which variable in this template.
+
+Someone suggested that we should allow using `slot-scope` on a component itself to denote its default slot's scope:
+
+``` html
+<foo slot-scope="foo">
+  {{ foo }}
+</foo>
+```
+
+Unfortunately, this cannot work as it would lead to ambiguity with component nesting:
+
+``` html
+<parent>
+  <foo slot-scope="foo"> <!-- provided by parent or by foo? -->
+    {{ foo }}
+  </foo>
+</parent>
+```
+
+This is why I now believe allowing using `slot-scope` without a template was a mistake.
+
+### Why a new directive instead of fixing `slot-scope`?
+
+If we can go back in time, I would probably change the semantics of `slot-scope` - but:
+
+1. That would be a breaking change now, and that means we will never be able to ship it in 2.x.
+
+2. Even if we change in in 3.x, changing the semantics of existing syntax can cause a LOT of confusion for future learners that Google into outdated learning materials. We definitely want to avoid that. So, we have to introduce something new to differentiate from `slot-scope`.
+
+3. In 3.x, we plan to unify slot types so it's no longer necessary to differentiate between scoped vs. non-scoped slots (conceptually). A slot may or may not receive props, but they are all just slots. With this conceptual unification, having `slot` and `slot-scope` being two special attributes seems unnecessary, and it would be nice to unify the syntax under a single construct as well.
+
+# Detailed design
+
+### Introducing a new directive: `v-slot`.
+
+- It can be used on `<template>` slot containers to denote slots passed to a component, where the slot name is expressed via the **directive argument**:
+
+  ``` html
+  <foo>
+    <template v-slot:header>
+      <div class="header"></div>
+    </template>
+
+    <template v-slot:body>
+      <div class="body"></div>
+    </template>
+
+    <template v-slot:footer>
+      <div class="footer"></div>
+    </template>
+  </foo>
+  ```
+
+  If any slot is a scoped slot which receives props, the received slot props can be declared using the directive's attribute value. The value of `v-slot` works the same way as `slot-scope`, so JavaScript argument destructuring is supported:
+
+  ``` html
+  <foo>
+    <template v-slot:header="{ msg }">
+      <div class="header">
+        Message from header slot: {{ msg }}
+      </div>
+    </template>
+  </foo>
+  ```
+
+- `v-slot` can be used directly on a component, without an argument, to indicate that the component's default slot is a scoped slot, and that props passed to the default slot should be available as the variable declared in its attribute value:
+
+  ``` html
+  <foo v-slot="{ msg }">
+    {{ msg }}
+  </foo>
+  ```
+
+### Comparison: New vs. Old
+
+Let's review whether this proposal achieves our goals outlined above:
+
+- Still provide succinct syntax for most common use cases of scoped slots (single default slot):
+
+  ``` html
+  <foo v-slot="{ msg }">{{ msg }}</foo>
+  ```
+
+- Clearer connection between scoped variable and the component that is providing it:
+
+  Let's take another look at the deep-nesting example using current syntax (`slot-scope`) - notice how slot scope variables provided by `<foo>` is declared on `<bar>`, and the variable provided by `<bar>` is declared on `<baz>`...
+
+  ``` html
+  <foo>
+    <bar slot-scope="foo">
+      <baz slot-scope="bar">
+        <div slot-scope="baz">
+          {{ foo }} {{ bar }} {{ baz }}
+        </div>
+      </baz>
+    </bar>
+  </foo>
+  ```
+
+  This is the equivalent using the new syntax:
+
+  ``` html
+  <foo v-slot="foo">
+    <bar v-slot="bar">
+      <baz v-slot="baz">
+        {{ foo }} {{ bar }} {{ baz }}
+      </baz>
+    </bar>
+  </foo>
+  ```
+
+  Notice that **the scope variable provided by a component is also declared on that component itself**. The new syntax shows a clearer connection between slot variable declaration and the component providing the variable.
+
+### More Usage Comparisons
+
+#### Default slot with text
+
+``` html
+<!-- old -->
+<foo>
+  <template slot-scope="{ msg }">
+    {{ msg }}
+  </template>
+</foo>
+
+<!-- new -->
+<foo v-slot="{ msg }">
+  {{ msg }}
+</foo>
+```
+
+#### Default slot with element
+
+``` html
+<!-- old -->
+<foo>
+  <div slot-scope="{ msg }">
+    {{ msg }}
+  </div>
+</foo>
+
+<!-- new -->
+<foo v-slot="{ msg }">
+  <div>
+    {{ msg }}
+  </div>
+</foo>
+```
+
+#### Nested default slots
+
+``` html
+<!-- old -->
+<foo>
+  <bar slot-scope="foo">
+    <baz slot-scope="bar">
+      <template slot-scope="baz">
+        {{ foo }} {{ bar }} {{ baz }}
+      </template>
+    </baz>
+  </bar>
+</foo>
+
+<!-- new -->
+<foo v-slot="foo">
+  <bar v-slot="bar">
+    <baz v-slot="baz">
+      {{ foo }} {{ bar }} {{ baz }}
+    </baz>
+  </bar>
+</foo>
+```
+
+#### Named slots
+
+``` html
+<!-- old -->
+<foo>
+  <template slot="one" slot-scope="{ msg }">
+    text slot: {{ msg }}
+  </template>
+
+  <div slot="two" slot-scope="{ msg }">
+    element slot: {{ msg }}
+  </div>
+</foo>
+
+<!-- new -->
+<foo>
+  <template v-slot:one="{ msg }">
+    text slot: {{ msg }}
+  </template>
+
+  <template v-slot:two="{ msg }">
+    <div>
+      element slot: {{ two }}
+    </div>
+  </template>
+</foo>
+```
+
+#### Nested & mixed usage of named / default slots
+
+``` html
+<!-- old -->
+<foo>
+  <bar slot="one" slot-scope="one">
+    <div slot-scope="bar">
+      {{ one }} {{ bar }}
+    </div>
+  </bar>
+
+  <bar slot="two" slot-scope="two">
+    <div slot-scope="bar">
+      {{ two }} {{ bar }}
+    </div>
+  </bar>
+</foo>
+
+<!-- new -->
+<foo>
+  <template v-slot:one="one">
+    <bar v-slot="bar">
+      <div>{{ one }} {{ bar }}</div>
+    </bar>
+  </template>
+
+  <template v-slot:two="two">
+    <bar v-slot="bar">
+      <div>{{ two }} {{ bar }}</div>
+    </bar>
+  </template>
+</foo>
+```
+
+# Drawbacks
+
+- Introducing a new syntax introduces churn and makes a lot of learning materials covering this topic in the ecosystem outdated. New users may get confused by discovering a new syntax after going through existing tutorials.
+
+  - We need good documentation updates on scoped slots to help with this.
+
+- The default slot usage `v-slot="{ msg }"` doesn't precisely convey the concept that `msg` is being passed to the slot as a prop.
+
+# Alternatives
+
+- New special attribute `slot-props` ([as a previous version of this draft](https://github.com/vuejs/rfcs/blob/8575e72d5a401db5d7206e127e3a6012491d68ed/active-rfcs/0000-new-scoped-slots-syntax.md))
+- Directive (`v-scope`) instead of a special attribute as originally proposed in [#9180](https://github.com/vuejs/vue/issues/9180);
+- Alternative shorthand symbol (`&`) as suggested by @rellect [here](https://github.com/vuejs/vue/issues/9306#issuecomment-453946190)
+
+# Adoption strategy
+
+The change is fully backwards compatible, so we can roll it out in a minor release (planned for 2.6).
+
+`slot-scope` is going to be soft-deprecated: it will be marked deprecated in the docs, and we would encourage everyone to use / switch to the new syntax, but we won't bug you with deprecation messages just yet because we know it's not a top priority for everyone to always migrate to the newest stuff.
+
+In 3.0 we do plan to eventually remove `slot-scope`, and only support the new syntax. We will start emitting deprecation messages for `slot-scope` usage in the next 2.x minor release to ease the migration to 3.0.
+
+Since this is a pretty well defined syntax change, we can potentially provide a migration tool that can automatically convert your templates to the new syntax.