CE-225: Award => grant, org name/ID to Organization object

[ialarmedalien]

Some schema changes brought about after aligning the schema with schema.org:

• use an organisation object instead of having funder_name and funder_id
• switch from using 'award' to using 'grant' instead

I'll need to update the spec and the generated classes but have a few other schema alterations to make, so will do them first.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #684 (dc422dd) into develop (89be679) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             develop     #684      +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage      86.70%   86.69%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity      5397     5395       -2     
=============================================
  Files            242      242              
  Lines          18286    18276      -10     
  Branches        2674     2674              
=============================================
- Hits           15855    15845      -10     
  Misses          1962     1962              
  Partials         469      469              

[MrCreosote]

Just so I understand this change - it seems like it's tightening the requirements for who can be a funder. With the old funderID and funderName, an individual could be a funder, but now only orgs are allowed. Similarly, award seems more general than grant, and so it seems some funding sources can no longer be represented

[ialarmedalien]

Correct. This brings the CE schema terminology in closer alignment with schema.org, which will be more helpful when generating search engine indexable content for static narratives. Although sources like DataCite and Crossref use 'award' and 'grant' interchangeably, 'award' is commonly used to refer to prizes, which is not what we want to represent here.

[MrCreosote]

I'm a little worried that this makes things a bit too specific - the workspace has always been written with the philosophy that it's not a a KBase specific service and could work for all kinds of data. I guess it's easier to open things up later vs. tighten them down though, so for now...

[MrCreosote]

There's no need for this cast as there isn't another getBuilder method with a different type, but it's only minor cruft and so NBD. Same with the one in the test below.