[slf4j-dev] Re: TRACE level

[Curt Arnold]

Two quick comments.

I'm not fond of the term "ignored".  "error", "warn" and "info" are  
all statements about the developer's assessment of the severity of  
logging request, "ignored" is a statement of what the developer  
things a diagnostician would do with the information.  I would think  
"expected" would be a better term since it is a statement that the  
developer thought the exception would likely occur.

I haven't closely followed the "marker" proposal, but possibly it  
would be useful to consider the existing logging hierarchy to be  
analogous a class hierarchy and the marker proposal to be an  
indication of a desire for something like the interface construct  
where classes in radically different parts of the hierarchy could be  
grouped by some other aspect.  If that was followed, then you could  
see something like a logger declaration including both a name  
(establishing its place in the hierarchy) and a set of "interface"  
names that the logger should participate in.