Rename 'contact' to something more explicit

[buske]

As suggested by GA4GH metadata: ga4gh/ga4gh-schemas#234

Since the 'contact' field is within each 'patient' object, it makes it look like these are the contact details for the patient, rather than the submitter/owner.

There are several decent options that I see:

1. Renaming the field; I would suggest 'submitter'.
2. Moving the field; we could move it from within a patient object to within a 'metadata' object at the level of the patient object.

[buske]

Migrating discussion from PR #65:

From @fschiettecatte:

In the case of GeneMatcher it will be a submitter, but in the case of Decipher it is the method of contact. I think contact is better overall.

From @Relequestual:

I think for more general usage outside of MME, a contact field under patient may imply contacting the patient, but in this instance, who is being contacted is different, as @fschiettecatte points out. Renaming the field to "submitted" would be missleading also.

If we really feel "contact" is ambigious, dispite documentation on what the field represents, then maybe a better naming would be "clincian_contact". We don't specify what sort of contact method it is, so in the case of GeneMatcher it is email, in the case of Decipher it's a URL which will allow the user to make a contact request.

[Relequestual]

Oh, actually, now I see option 2 clearly presented, I think that would be preferable. Meta-data contact, to me, makes it clear that it's not contact details of the patient, but contact details regarding their data.

[fschiettecatte]

+1 for @Relequestual's comments, make it clear it is separate from the patient and call it whatever makes sense.

[buske]

I propose closing this as an unnecessary backwards-incompatible change, or pushed to 2.0.

[Relequestual]

I'll migrate this to 2.0 milestone and we can address it there if we still feel it's needed.