Defect in XBD 3.393_Thread

[yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

        Defect report from : Andrew Josey , The Open Group

(Please direct followup comments direct to yyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)

@ page 90 line 2884 section 3.393_Thread comment {impldef}

Problem:

Edition of Specification (Year): 2003

Defect code :  3. Clarification required

The text says that 


"Anything whose address may be determined by a thread, including but not
limited to static variables, storage obtained via malloc( ), directly
addressable storage obtained through implementation-defined functions, and 
automatic variables, are accessible to all threads in the same process."

Use of the term implementation-defined requires the PCD to document 
the functions as noted above. Is there benefit to this? Or do
we really want to say unspecified or do we want to drop that part
of the sentence?


Action:

Change "implementation-defined" to "unspecified"
or remove "directly...functions"