RFR: 8339852: Fix typos in java.compiler documentation [v2]

[Dan Smith]

On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 10:33:24 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Yes, that use of "type" in 9.6.4.1. feels like an overlook.
>
> Chen, I suggest we integrate this PR as is but ask JLS experts/authors on the issue. In fact, I've already asked. I suspect that JLS 9.6.4.1 is germane to this discussion. If JLS changes "type" to "interface" in JLS 9.6.4.1, we could change these occurrences of "type" to "interface" in `AnnotatedConstruct` too.

There's really nothing wrong with talking about the type of an annotation, just like you can talk about the type of a variable. If it's the most intuitive way to express what you're trying to say, go for it!

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20937#discussion_r1759003606