Field names

[ekes]

While there is a review on of use of topics, we're also starting to reference these fields quite a lot. So if there is to be a change now is the time.

Summary of predicted outcome:

Two fields one for putting content into a topic; the second for referencing a topic.

The first means the content appears in lists of that topic. The second means that the content can show lists of the content, but isn't itself in the topic. Generally content pages have the former, and landing pages have the latter.

There is also the possibility of the 'private' field. This being a variant of the first that isn't displayed.

So the fields should get names reflecting these uses; and should be namespaced with localgov_ (as things like field_topic or similar are highly likely to clash when installed on existing systems).

[ekes]

For the first type of field:- field_topic_term => localgov_node_topic Maybe?

The second isn't in the module yet (but depends on it for the vocabulary) so may as well be and shared: In services for example field_popular_topics => localgov_related_topic

Naming things is hard @finnlewis @andybroomfield any thoughts?

[ekes]

Vocabulary will also want renaming. Assume that can just: topic => localgov_topics (plural?)

[ekes]

What about localgov_topic_classified localgov_topic_referenced

[ekes]

Above PR merged. This is done. Follow-up is #4