On Mar 18, 2013, at 7:04 PM, Ian Robinson wrote:
>
>> Hi Paul,
>> On (1), while I think its OK to choose to remove section 5, if we do this it
>> should have a new section (e.g. like the EJB 3.2 spec) that states something
>> like
>> *Other Requirements*
>> *The behaviors described in the Javadoc specification of the JTA interfaces
>> are required functionality and must be implemented by compliant providers.*
> I've added "4.3 Other Requirements" with this verbatim.
Ian, that's always true for all specs. Why did you think it needed to be said
explicitly here?
Did you think there was some case where a compliant implementation could ignore
the requirements of the specification?
Lest there be any doubt, the javadocs are *part of* the specification.