Hey, everyone. After encountering a number of issues arising from the use of various Avro encoder/decoder implementations, each with a varying degree of specification compliance, I've begun implementing a thorough schema compliance checker. While going through the specification, however, I believe there's an inconsistency: the documentation for fixed types omits an optional doc attribute.
Given the type, and its similarity to other like-types, this omission doesn't seem to make sense. Likewise, the overall Avro specification appears to conflict with the IDL specification, which states, "Comments that begin with /** are used as the documentation string for the type or field definition that follows the comment." In this case, it seems a doc attribute is valid for all type/field definitions, including fixed types. If I'm misunderstanding this inconsistency, please let me know. Otherwise, if doc is a valid attribute for any type/field definition, can the specification be updated appropriately? -- Jonah H. Harris
