When @larrybabb did the most recent CodableConcept-related changes, he noted that some of the value sets already had names that matched current types, so he appended 'Type' to those names (for example, MolecularConsequenceType). However, this was not consistent because there was not already existing types with those names elsewhere (and in some cases, there is a 'Type' suffix where there is not an existing non-suffixed name -- for instance RegionAnnotationType).
To address the current MolecularConsequence/MolecularConsequenceType case, these could be changed to AlleleConsequence (or AlleleMolecularConsequence) and MolecularConsequence, respectively.
When @larrybabb did the most recent CodableConcept-related changes, he noted that some of the value sets already had names that matched current types, so he appended 'Type' to those names (for example, MolecularConsequenceType). However, this was not consistent because there was not already existing types with those names elsewhere (and in some cases, there is a 'Type' suffix where there is not an existing non-suffixed name -- for instance RegionAnnotationType).
To address the current MolecularConsequence/MolecularConsequenceType case, these could be changed to AlleleConsequence (or AlleleMolecularConsequence) and MolecularConsequence, respectively.