Add impacts on implementors to the definition of breaking changes.

Author: Jascha Franklin-Hodge

.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature-request---proposal.md

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ A clear and concise description of what the problem is. Ex. I'm always frustrate
 A clear and concise description of what you want to happen.
 
 **Is this a breaking change**
-A breaking change would require consumers of the API to modify their code for it to continue to function (ex: renaming of a required field or the change in data type of an existing field). A non-breaking change would allow existing code to continue to function (ex: addition of an optional field or the creation of a new optional endpoint). 
+A breaking change would require consumers or implementors of the API to modify their code for it to continue to function (ex: renaming of a required field or the change in data type of an existing field). A non-breaking change would allow existing code to continue to function (ex: addition of an optional field or the creation of a new optional endpoint). 
 
 [  ] Yes, breaking
 [  ] No, not breaking

.github/pull_request_template.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 Please provide a clear and concise reason for this pull request and the impact of the change
 
 **Is this a breaking change**
-A breaking change would require consumers of the API to modify their code for it to continue to function (ex: renaming of a required field or the change in data type of an existing field). A non-breaking change would allow existing code to continue to function (ex: addition of an optional field or the creation of a new optional endpoint). 
+A breaking change would require consumers or implementors of the API to modify their code for it to continue to function (ex: renaming of a required field or the change in data type of an existing field). A non-breaking change would allow existing code to continue to function (ex: addition of an optional field or the creation of a new optional endpoint). 
 
 [  ] Yes, breaking
 [  ] No, not breaking