docs: use an array of strings as authors in proposal metadata

[larry0x]

Description

It makes more sense if the authors field in the proposal metadata is an array of strings instead of single string (since a proposal can have more than one authors).

Discussion on twitter: https://twitter.com/hxrts/status/1608373720996880387

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• followed the guidelines for building modules
• included the necessary unit and integration tests
• added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
• included comments for documenting Go code
• updated the relevant documentation or specification
• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage
• manually tested (if applicable)

[julienrbrt]

This makes sense, but now we have 0.46 and 0.47 have different recommended metadata schema. Maybe we should add a line mentioning that the recommendation was a simple string for 0.46.

[julienrbrt]

We prob need to update the draft-proposal command for group and gov too to support that. But it could be done a follow-up.

[tac0turtle]

Let's do the Changes in a follow up. Happy to submit a pr later today

[larry0x]

This makes sense, but now we have 0.46 and 0.47 have different recommended metadata schema. Maybe we should add a line mentioning that the recommendation was a simple string for 0.46.

I did not know about 0.47 having a new metadata schema. Is there a link to it?

[julienrbrt]

This makes sense, but now we have 0.46 and 0.47 have different recommended metadata schema. Maybe we should add a line mentioning that the recommendation was a simple string for 0.46.

I did not know about 0.47 having a new metadata schema. Is there a link to it?

The new one is the one you've just made by changing the authors field :)
Explorers still need to support both the one with the string for 0.46 (because chains are already using this format) and the one with the array for v0.47+
That's why I think just a note in a doc might be useful.