feat: add OTel utility function

[gruebel]

This PR

• it is mostly equivalent to the JS implementation, except I named the field body and not data, which seems to fit better to OTel

Related Issues

Fixes#448

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.85%. Comparing base (613388d) to head (29aafbc).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #451 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.72% 97.85% +0.12% 
==========================================
Files 32 37 +5 Lines 1629 1723 +94 ==========================================
+ Hits 1592 1686 +94 
Misses 37 37 

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	97.85% <100.00%> (+0.12%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[beeme1mr]

It looks like the OTel Python sdk only supports attributes in both span and log events. @dyladan can we include value as an attribute?

[dyladan]

I agree body is a better term because it is used by the otel spec: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/main/specification/logs/data-model.md#log-and-event-record-definition

All language implementations in OTel are experimental so I would refer to spec before referring to any language terms used.

[beeme1mr]

I agree body is a better term because it is used by the otel spec: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-specification/blob/main/specification/logs/data-model.md#log-and-event-record-definition

All language implementations in OTel are experimental so I would refer to spec before referring to any language terms used.

I've updated the JS implementation to use body.

[beeme1mr]

Look great, thanks! Good catch on the data vs body. I was just looking at the JS implementation but body is a better choice.