Audit Compliance: Logs Bridge API Artifact Naming

[MrAlias]

1. Review the Artifact Naming section of the Logs Bridge API specification for all normative statements
2. Audit the logs bridge API package for compliance with the specified normative statements.
3. Identify existing issues or create new issues to track any work needed to make the logs bridge API package compliant with the specification.

[dashpole]

There are two normative statements in the artifact naming section:

• The Logs Bridge API ... SHOULD include documentation that discourages direct use.
• [The] Log Bridge API artifact, package, and class names MUST NOT include the terms "bridge", "appender", or any other qualifier that would prevent evolution into a user facing API.

[dashpole]

The Logs Bridge API ... SHOULD include documentation that discourages direct use.

Our current statement is "It is not designed to be a logging API itself.", which I think could be a bit unclear for users. As an uninitiated users, i'm not sure what it would mean for a package providing logging-related interfaces to not be an API...

Log Bridge API artifact, package, and class names MUST NOT include the terms "bridge", "appender", or any other qualifier that would prevent evolution into a user facing API.

Our implementation is compliant with this requirement.