Stabilize reuse of Standard Attributes in Logs API

[pellared]

What are you trying to achieve?

Stabilize the following functionality:

opentelemetry-specification/specification/logs/api.md

Lines 127 to 133 in d203575

	**Status**: [Development](../document-status.md)
	The API SHOULD provide functionality for users to convert
	[Standard Attributes](../common/README.md#standard-attribute)
	so they can be used, or directly accept them, in the log signal.
	This allows the reuse of [Standard Attributes](../common/README.md#standard-attribute)
	across signals.

[pellared]

This is needed for stabilization of OTel Go Logs API.

CC @open-telemetry/go-maintainers

[pellared]

This seems to be supported by following languages:

• Java directly accepts standard attributes: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-java/blob/e6f90f58ce82c861f91fdf7474914ac66939b28f/sdk/logs/src/main/java/io/opentelemetry/sdk/logs/SdkLogRecordBuilder.java#L104-L116
• Collector uses the same attribute type ("extended attributes") for all signals
• .NET uses the same attribute type (object) for all signals
• Go has a conversion function: https://pkg.go.dev/go.opentelemetry.io/otel/log#KeyValueFromAttribute
• C++ directly accepts standard attributes: (https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-cpp/blob/a6779d8e21c008204ea4b62affbec177f931ede9/api/include/opentelemetry/logs/log_record.h#L57-L63
• Python directly accepts standard attributes: https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python/blob/db2dd1eaae5f6eab2ede127d291be824e10a1256/opentelemetry-api/src/opentelemetry/_logs/_internal/__init__.py#L93

[lmolkova]

Related: #4462 (comment) - if we end up formally documenting that having extended attributes on the API level is acceptable, we might want to reword this section a bit

[pellared]

Related: #4462 (comment) - if we end up formally documenting that having extended attributes on the API level is acceptable, we might want to reword this section a bit

I think it should be still possible to reword it in a backwards compatible way (given it occurs to be needed). At least personally I do not see how the proposals you mentioned would make the section "reuse of Standard Attributes" not compatible.