> On Mar 6, 2017, at 7:11 AM, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> > wrote: > > > > Mandy Chung wrote: >> >>> On Mar 4, 2017, at 5:14 PM, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> >>> <mailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8170701/webrev.01/ >>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8170701/webrev.01/> >>> >>> >> >> 40 * object {@link Module#isOpen opens} the containing package to the >> >> Nit: s/@link/@linkplain >> >> 41 * {@code javafx.fxml} module, either in its {@link ModuleDescriptor} >> 42 * (module-info.class) or by calling {@link Module#addOpens}. >> >> Do you intend to take out “(module-info.class)”? >> > > I was thinking to leave it in, since module-info.class is the most common way > to specify a ModuleDescription. Maybe better would be: > > @{link ModuleDescriptor} (e.g., in its module-info.class) >
That’s okay. >> 43 * An object is also reflectively accessible if it is declared as >> public, >> >> Does “it” mean its constructor? >> > > No. It means the declaration itself, for example: > > @FXML > public String myString; > > > as opposed to: > > @FXML > private String myString; I see. I’m not close to this spec. I am not sure if it worths further clarification such as “it is a public member”. I’ll leave it up for you to decide. Mandy
