Clarification on `SeverityText` Usage Relative to Recommended Short Names

[10xLaCroixDrinker]

Hello OpenTelemetry team,

I'm seeking guidance on several aspects of SeverityText and SeverityNumber as described in the OpenTelemetry logging specifications, particularly regarding the implementation and use of recommended short names. My inquiry stems from discussions and observations noted in Vunovati/pino-opentelemetry-transport#153.

Clarification on SeverityText and Recommended Short Names: Is there a recommended practice for utilizing short names as SeverityText? If the specifications envision these short names to be used directly as SeverityText, could this be explicitly stated, or are there guidelines for when to use more descriptive text?

Management Level of Short Names: It appears there might be a distinction between managing short names at a system level and SeverityText at the log record level. Could you provide clarity on this aspect and recommend how to approach scenarios where only short names are intended for use? Is omitting SeverityText in such cases aligned with best practices, or is there a preferred method to ensure consistency and clarity in logs?

I'm really hoping to get these points cleared up so we all can have a better understanding of how to work with SeverityText and short names the right way. It'd be great to make sure we're on the same page with OpenTelemetry's guidelines without making things too complicated or overthinking the implementation. Looking forward to your insights!

[MrAlias]

cc @open-telemetry/specs-logs-approvers

[trask]

[discussed during GC project management triage]

our understanding is:

• SeverityText can be populated with whatever is used by the upstream logging library (if there is one)
• "Short name" is only a recommendation for displaying the severity in backends when SeverityText is missing
• This could be made clearer in the specification