While looking at
https://glassfish.dev.java.net/javaee5/persistence/entity-persistence-support.html
I noticed that there's quite a few property names, hint names, etc. that
aren't qualified in any way that makes it clear they're specific to the
implementation. For example, I expected "jdbc.driver" to be named
"toplink.jdbc.driver" or something like that. I don't think we want to
give the impression that these implementation-specific properties are
really standard properties that are (or should) be supported by all
implementations. (If necessary, the implementation could support
both the old names and the new names for compatibility, while only
documenting the new names.)
I'm not on this mailing list so if you have any concerns please reply to
me directly.
Thanks.
Bill Shannon
Java EE Spec Lead