defaulted attribute access type for a hierarchy when root is annotated @Access

If the root of an entity class hierarchy is annotated `@Access`, then it seems to me that the spec is very unclear on how the default access type for the class hierarchy is determined. [The effect of `@Access` is not inherited, and I don't think it should be.]

So what is the expected behavior if a subclass does not explicitly specify `@Access`?

Either:

1. it's an error: all classes in an entity hierarchy with a root annotated `@Access` must also be annotated `@Access`, or
2. we consider all subclasses of the root class in determining the default access type.

I imagine that 2 is what was intended, but it's unclear. And, since the `@Id` attribute is declared by the root entity, the subclasses in principle might not have any mapping annotations allowing the default access type to be inferred. Consider:

```java
@Entity @Access(FIELD)
class Root {
@Id String id;
}

@Entity
class Child extends Root {
String name;
String getName();
void setName(String name);
}
```

what is the access type of `Child`? I don't think it has one.

We need to say something more explicit here.

Review the Jakarta Persistence access-type rules against the Root/Child example in the issue, focusing on how a subclass without @Access determines its default. Compare the two proposed interpretations and identify the specification wording needed; done means the behavior for this hierarchy is explicitly defined.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.