FULL PRODUCT VERSION :
java version "1.4.0"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.4.0-b92)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.4.0-b92, mixed mode)

FULL OPERATING SYSTEM VERSION :
 customer  Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]

A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM :
Javadoc marks interface methods with the public access
modifiers, which is always implied for interfaces. The
JLS "strongly discourages" this style.

see:

http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/second_edition/html/interfaces.doc.html#78651 

"Every method declaration in the body of an interface is implicitly public. 

It is permitted, but strongly discouraged as a matter of style, to redundantly specify the public modifier for interface methods."


STEPS TO FOLLOW TO REPRODUCE THE PROBLEM :
1. Look at the JavaDoc for java.util.List for example

This bug can be reproduced always.
(Review ID: 146008) 
======================================================================

N/A

Javadoc's philosophy is to show both explicit and implicit modifiers
in the signature, despite the JLS convention.  To hide the "public" modifier 
from interface methods would be counter to this philosophy.

  xxxxx@xxxxx   2002-11-24

  xxxxx@xxxxx   wrote:
Yes, I think it is fine for this to appear in the javadoc.

  xxxxx@xxxxx   2002-11-24

>Would you agree that although the JLS suggests not explicitly writing "public"
>in the declaration of interface declarations, that it's fine for javadoc 
>to do so?

  xxxxx@xxxxx   replied:
No.

Re-opening to get a concensus.  Notice that since 1.2, "abstract" has not 
been displayed, due to:
  4096581: interface methods should not be mark 'abstract' 

  xxxxx@xxxxx   2002-11-25

  xxxxx@xxxxx   wrote:
   I think it's unnecessary to display the public modifier under these 
   circumstances.   "When in doubt, leave it out."

So let's leave out the "public" modifier.
  xxxxx@xxxxx   2003-09-30

Fixed.  The public modifier is now omitted for interface fields and methods.
  xxxxx@xxxxx   2003-11-15