all: add notes about the attribute values restrictions #683
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pellared
changed the title
|
The OTEP says
but IMO we effectively still create a new convention of "plain old standard attributes", spelling it in plain text like comments in this PR. I think it would be better to have an explicit name for it. |
The intent of this PR is to describe the current state of art. You can consider this PR as a "bugfix". Thanks to it would be easier for us to communicate future changes in the OTLP protocol (new supported attribute types). |
jsuereth
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2025
lmolkova
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2025
trask
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2025
MrAlias
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2025
lmolkova
reviewed
Jul 22, 2025
christos68k
reviewed
Jul 25, 2025
christos68k
approved these changes
Jul 31, 2025
christos68k
reviewed
Jul 31, 2025
No worries. Fixes applied 😉 |
carlosalberto
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2025
tigrannajaryan
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2025
github-merge-queue bot
pushed a commit
to open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 19, 2025
…hange (#4614) Towards #4602 Per OTEP: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/main/oteps/4485-extending-attributes-to-support-complex-values.md#why-doesnt-this-require-a-major-version-bump This basically reverts: - #3858 Before we did not have a consensus to extend the attribute value types. However, this has changed with: - #4485 Related proto PR: - open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto#683 **As a follow-up I plan to create issues in all language repositories so that they can prepare their APIs and SDKs to extend the attribute value types.** --------- Co-authored-by: Trask Stalnaker <[email protected]>
This was referenced Aug 26, 2025
Merged
tigrannajaryan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 2, 2025
### Changed - profiles: drop gzip requirement. [#661](#661) - profiles: avoid `optional` keyword usage. [#659](#659) - profiles: make `profile_id` optional. [#665](#665) - profiles: use single `Profile.sample_type` and clarify use of timestamps. [#649](#649) - all: add notes about the attribute values restrictions. [#683](https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-proto/pull/683)<br>⚠️ **IMPORTANT**: These restrictions can be dropped in a future minor release. - profiles: clarify usage of the zero value as the first element of tables in `ProfilesDictionary`. [#688](#688), [#698](#698) - profiles: unsigned `time_nanos` and `duration_nanos` in `Profile`. [#692](#692) - profiles: improve attribute encoding in `ProfilesDictionary`. [#672](#672) - profiles: simplify profile stack trace representation. [#708](#708) ### Fixed - examples: fix OTLP JSON Event example body. [#666](#666) - docs: minor specification fixes around `UNAVAILABLE` and `RetryInfo`. [#669](#669) ### Removed - profiles: remove `default_sample_type`. [#679](#679) - profiles: remove `has_*` debug info fields, they are moving to attributes. [#595](#595) - profiles: remove `Location.is_folded`. [#690](#690)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
10 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Per open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification#4595 (comment)
Towards https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/8aa1d27d9cf8c224299dcf0b58bfd5fcaacf88eb/oteps/4485-extending-attributes-to-support-complex-values.md?plain=1#L223-L227
The intent of this PR is to describe the current state of art.
You can consider this PR as a "bugfix". Thanks to it would be easier for us to communicate future changes in the OTLP protocol (new supported attribute types).
Related OTEP: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/main/oteps/4485-extending-attributes-to-support-complex-values.md
Some of the language is based on JSON RFC https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8259#section-4:
Notice that this kind of description should be present in the comments even without the intent to go forward with https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/main/oteps/4485-extending-attributes-to-support-complex-values.md
Related spec PR: