Am I understand it right, that you suggest instead of doing it in a generic way (any tracing method could be plugged in this way), to stick to one particular library?
And since this is a standard, it means that when a user includes a bunch of disparate libraries/remote calls in his app, he can define his instrumentation wishes once for everything during app initialization. The libraries can even cooperate since they use the same underlying API and concepts for instrumentation.
I agree that this uppercase words can be called as somewhat purposes of the tracing API. I believe also that I was talking exactly about the same approach in the article. But I can't get how sticking to one particular library will help here? In other words, I think it will just greatly reduce the usage options.
What Im saying is that you can leave the generic hooks in the library (as it described in the article and gtrace) and then let the user choose which library to use inside what hooks.
With hooks, you get nothing unless you hook, which means you have to write hooks for everything you're interested in (and also come up with a way to export the data), and so the user must touch code all over the place.