Rename ToolConfigurationFacet from ToolConfigurationTypeFacet in Update tool.ttl

[gwebb-case]

This pull request relates to Issue #451, and the updating of the turtle file tool.ttl

Renaming of old Facet ToolConfigurationTypeFacet to ToolConfigurationFacet, which required changes to four (4) lines to within the turtle file tool.ttl.

The changes made are:

1. Remove the text "Type" from the facet "ToolConfigurationTypeFacet", so that it becomes "ToolConfigurationFacet" (changes on lines 359, 365, 379), and
2. Update the comment by replacing "A tool configuration type facet...." with "A tool configuration facet...." (line 366).

The change is expected to be low risk

Coordination

• [ ] Pull Request is against correct branch
• [ ] Pull Request is in, or reverted to, Draft status before Solutions Approval vote has passed.
• [ ] CI passes in (CASE/UCO) feature branch
• [ ] CI passes in UCO current unstable branch (merge-commit)
• [ ] CI passes in CASE current unstable branch tracking UCO's unstable as submodule (merge-commit)
• [ ] Impact on SHACL validation reviewed for CASE-Examples
• [ ] Impact on SHACL validation remediated for CASE-Examples
• [ ] Impact on SHACL validation reviewed for casework.github.io
• [ ] Impact on SHACL validation remediated for casework.github.io
• [ ] Milestone linked
• [ ] Solutions Approval vote logged on corresponding Issue (once logged, can be taken out of Draft PR status)

[ajnelson-nist]

@gwebb-case - this PR was made starting from the wrong branch (master, should have been develop) and is not targeting the right branch (should target develop). I will try to do a git cherry-pick to fix the branching pattern.

[ajnelson-nist]

Closing this PR as superseded by PR 464.

[ajnelson-nist]

@gwebb-case - I don't think it would have been possible to adjust this PR satisfactorily. You had done a master -> master branching pattern, and it would have been problematic if I tried doing a git push --force to your master branch. We'll handle the contents of this PR over in #464.

[gwebb-case]

My mistake, I created a fork using the default settings - which as you point out only copied the master branch. I have deleted my copy of this branch, and will re-try forking the whole repository so that I can make the changes in the develop branch. All new conversations updates relating to this will be in #464.

[ajnelson-nist]

@gwebb-case - thank you for the user experience perspective. It's another argument for us to switch to develop being the "primary" branch w.r.t. the Github interface. Having master be primary has tripped up many pull requests.