Add new Blazor metrics for Net10

[pavelsavara]

Changes

Adding new metrics for Blazor UI framework

Related PR
dotnet/aspnetcore#61609

Merge requirement checklist

• CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines followed.
• Change log entry added, according to the guidelines in When to add a changelog entry.
  • If your PR does not need a change log, start the PR title with [chore]
• schema-next.yaml updated with changes to existing conventions.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

• ❌ - login: @pavelsavara / name: Pavel Savara . The commit (39b8440, 278c73a, 92f860b, 5142761) is not authorized under a signed CLA. Please click here to be authorized. For further assistance with EasyCLA, please submit a support request ticket.

[lmolkova]

It's a type of a specific component, right? If I understand correctly, the goal is to stay consistent with Ms.AspMetCore.Components namespace, but on the telemetry, in the context of specific component, it looks confusing, so suggesting

Suggested change

	- id: aspnetcore.components.type
	- id: aspnetcore.component.type

OTel suggests not to use plural form in metric namespaces - https://github.com/open-telemetry/semantic-conventions/blob/1000be4d897fafbc8554b373267992e47c1b86ac/docs/general/naming.md#pluralization

[lmolkova]

yes, check out https://github.com/open-telemetry/semantic-conventions/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#2-update-the-markdown-files and you can use other md files as examples, e.g.

semantic-conventions/docs/dotnet/dotnet-aspnetcore-metrics.md

Line 35 in 86cad42

<!-- semconv metric.aspnetcore.routing.match_attempts -->

we don't have it yaml (yet), but we should document recommended boundaries for histograms - e.g. like here https://github.com/open-telemetry/semantic-conventions/blob/main/docs/dotnet/dotnet-http-metrics.md#metric-httpclientrequesttime_in_queue

[lmolkova]

/ cc @semconv-dotnet-approver @stevejgordon @martinjt

[pavelsavara]

@lmolkova thanks for your time and feedback, appreciated.

Let's move naming discussion back the other PR to where there are the rest of the stakeholders, so we don't have to duplicate the same explanations twice.

I will update this PR once we reach conclusion there. I will also add more links and explanations later.