I've been reading the discussion around jsr342 at
http://java.net/projects/javaee-spec/lists/jsr342-experts/archive/2012-01/message/35.
My personal thoughts are that we really have to provide the same behaviour as that provided by EJB transactional intercepters (D3 S2c A1). As this is a JEE related specification, users are going to find it very strange that the semantics of these, seemingly identical, annotations are different. More dangerously, there are going to be many users who don't know that the semantics around exception handling and rollback are different, potentially causing the behaviour of there application to change in unexpected ways.
I think, unless there is something fundamentally broken with the way EJB transaction annotations work, we should just provide the same semantics.
Paul.
--
Paul Robinson
Web service transactions lead
paul.robinson_at_redhat.com
JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Brendan Lane (Ireland), Matt Parson
(USA), Charlie Peters (USA)