OneToMany differences - Hibernate EntityManager 3.3.1 and TPL11.1.1.0.0

Question

Two entities 'Employee' and 'Address'. Employees as a collection of 'Addresses' and I want to map this OneToMany unidirectionally. In doing so I've noticed some differences between Hibernate EM 3.3.1 and TPL 11.1.1.0.0. Apart from the fact that I didn't manage to get this OneToMany mapping working in Toplink - can somebody explain why there is a difference, since it is standard.
@OneToMany without any other annotations in Hibernate results in (With ddl creation on):
a created intersection/jointable containing two FKs for each relationship end.
@OneToMany without any other annotations in Toplink results in (With ddl creation on):
Exception Description: [class com.cumquatit.research.derby.domain.Employee] uses a non-entity [class com.cumquatit.research.derby.domain.Address] as target entity in the relationship attribute [private java.util.Collection com.cumquatit.research.derby.domain.Employee.addresses].
@OneToMany with @JoinColumn(name="EMPLOYEE_ID") in Hibernate results in:
a created column (EMPLOYEE_ID) at the Address table which is FK to Employee.
@OneToMany with @JoinColumn(name="EMPLOYEE_ID") in Toplink results in:
Exception Description: one-to-many for attribute name [addresses] in entity class [class com.cumquatit.research.derby.domain.Employee] should not have join-column(s) specified. In the case where the one-to-many is not mapped by another entity (that is, it is the owning side and is uni-directional), it should specify (optional through defaulting) a join-table.
Thanks (again),
-J.

Answer 1

Update -
Having established that the @OneToMany + @JoinColumn annotation as accepted by Hibernate is non-standard, and the fact that that unidirectional OneToMany relationships should be implemented using a JoinTable, I have found yet another error (of mine) that Hibernate is ironing out.
Regardind @OneToMany and Toplink I now can confirm that this indeed works according to specs. Toplink will create the tables like so:
CREATE TABLE EMPLOYEE (ID INTEGER NOT NULL, EMPLOYEENUMBER VARCHAR(10)
UNIQUE NOT NULL, GENDER VARCHAR(255), FULLNAME VARCHAR(255), HIREDATE DATE,
EMAIL_ADDRESS VARCHAR(255), PRIMARY KEY (ID))
CREATE TABLE ADDRESS (ID INTEGER NOT NULL, ADDRESSLINEONE VARCHAR(255), CITY
VARCHAR(255), ZIPCODE VARCHAR(255), PRIMARY KEY (ID))
CREATE TABLE EMPLOYEE_ADDRESS (Employee_ID INTEGER NOT NULL, addresses_ID
INTEGER NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (Employee_ID, addresses_ID))
ALTER TABLE EMPLOYEE_ADDRESS ADD CONSTRAINT MPLYADDRESSmplyeID FOREIGN KEY
(Employee_ID) REFERENCES EMPLOYEE (ID)
ALTER TABLE EMPLOYEE_ADDRESS ADD CONSTRAINT MPLYDDRESSddrsssID FOREIGN KEY (addresses_ID) REFERENCES ADDRESS (ID)The thing I was missing - silly mistake coming - was to incorporate the entity class in the orm.xml file as it is references from the persistence.xml file. Not doing so in Toplink will yield:
Exception Description: [class com.cumquatit.research.derby.domain.Employee] uses a non-entity [class com.cumquatit.research.derby.domain.Address] as target entity in the relationship attribute [private java.util.Collection com.cumquatit.research.derby.domain.Employee.addresses].It looks like Hibernate simply corrects my mistake by implicitly using the referenced class.