Inconsistent use of configuration artefact attributes

[Justus-at-Tazama]

The attribute descriptions used in the rule collection in the database do not match Tazama's documentation and rule configuration artefacts.

Current behaviour

When a new rule processor is created, the database contains the following entry for the rule:

{
  "cfg": "1.0.0",
  "desc": "Rule 002",
  "name": "002",
  "dataType": "NUMERIC",
  "ownerId": "tazama-config-studio-admin@tazama.org",
  "state": "01_DRAFT",
  "createdAt": "2025-09-08T16:00:24.985Z",
  "updatedAt": "2025-09-08T16:12:54.149Z",
  "updatedBy": "tazama-config-studio-admin@tazama.org"
}

A rule processor in Tazama is identified by a name and a version, which is collectively known as the rule identifier and presented as a concatenation of the name, an @ symbol, and the version. Ref https://github.com/tazama-lf/docs/blob/dev/Product/configuration-management.md#rule-configuration-metadata

The rule id is intended to be unique across the system and is used as the key for a specific rule configureation when combined with the rule configuration version, e.g. name@ver@cfg.

In the config service, the version is incorrectly represented by cfg, which in Tazama reflects the version of the rule processor configuration, and not the rule processor.

Expected behaviour

Rename cfg to ver in the database in the rule collection.