I like of Evan's solution that it's similar to the `options:` syntax that we already have. And yes, it requires some boilerplate code the first time, but then every further option is just an array item.
However, it's not such a strong opinion. I can live with Zeb's proposal.
Yeah, though if I'd thought about it I would have said the same thing there (or possibly I thought about it but didn't want to bother bikeshedding.)