Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add section to clarify pluralization rules #3641

Closed

Conversation

ChrsMark
Copy link
Member

@ChrsMark ChrsMark commented Aug 4, 2023

This PR adds a section in the Name Pluralization guidelines to clarify an exception for using the plural form as this was discussed at open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#203 (comment).

@mx-psi @MikePaquette @AlexanderWert feel free to have a look and suggest anything here.

Signed-off-by: ChrsMark <chrismarkou92@gmail.com>
@arminru
Copy link
Member

arminru commented Aug 7, 2023

cc @open-telemetry/specs-semconv-approvers

@@ -64,6 +64,13 @@ Names SHOULD follow these rules:
and the value type SHOULD be an array. E.g. `process.command_args` might include multiple
values: the executable name and command arguments.

- An exception to the above can occur when the attribute name in the plural form conflicts
with another possible meaning. For example, using `host.ip` instead of `host.ips` is preferred
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wouldn't this be better as host.ip_addresses then?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please comment on open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#203 (comment), so far we have discussed the following possibilities:

  • host.ip.addresses
  • host.ip
  • host.socket.address

with no consensus

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This addition is mostly to reflect the arguments shared at open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#203 (comment). But yes let's keep the conversation at that PR.

@jsuereth
Copy link
Contributor

semi-related: #3658

@github-actions
Copy link

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Aug 23, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

Closed as inactive. Feel free to reopen if this PR is still being worked on.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this Aug 31, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants