berkeley-schema: instrument_name

[mslarae13]

@naglepuff presented a local instance of the NMDC data portal using the berkeley-schema. @turbomam pointed out that using instrument_name for filtering isn't the best

• it's a string an inconsistent
• we have consistent enumerated values in vendor and model

For some data types, @SamuelPurvine & @corilo, have pointed out, it's VERY important to know what exact instrument generated what data.
So while the model and vendor may both be model: solarix_15T vendor: bruker, the instrument bay be name: 15T FT-ICR MS-1 and name: 15T FT-ICR MS-2.

CURRENTLY in NMDC, the model, vendor, and name are 1:1:1, there are no repeated models and vendors with names.
EVENTUALLY there will be.

Proposal:
Now

• Update NMDC data portal to show instrument_model for berk roll out
• Update enum permissible values to have descriptions and title (like we did for https://microbiomedata.github.io/berkeley-schema-fy24/DoiProviderEnum/)

Later

• Post berk, and as a separate squad, re-evaluate the search function associated with instrument
• Add ACTUAL instrument names / identifiers to know when data came from different instruments of the same kind.

Would like opinions on the NOW proposal this week.
@SamuelPurvine @kheal @lamccue @brynnz22

[kheal]

@mslarae13 I think we landed on instrument_model rather than instrument_vendor as the UI-for-now solution per our discussion earlier. If that's what you meant, then I approve of the NOW proposed actions.

[kheal]

Another note of clarification, there are a few instances of multiple models per vendor, but do not think there are multiple vendors per any specific model. The name:instrument_model are (I believe) 1:1 as you note.