[Ontology] Flatten concept declarations in ontology spec

[jochenchrist]

Changes the ontology component syntax so the concept name is the value of concept: instead of a nested object with a name: key.

Before:

name: EnterpriseOntology
ontology:
  - concept:
      name: SocialSecurityNr
      type: ValueType
      extends: [Integer]
  - concept:
      name: Employee
      type: EntityType
      extends: [Person]

After:

name: EnterpriseOntology
ontology:
  - concept: SocialSecurityNr
    type: ValueType
    extends: [Integer]
  - concept: Employee
    type: EntityType
    extends: [Person]

• ontology.md: all YAML snippets use the flattened form; the component/concept schema tables are merged into one table with concept as the name field and relationships alongside it.
• ontology.json: OntologyComponent now takes concept as a string plus the former Concept fields inline; the separate Concept def is removed; concept and type are required.
• examples/flights.yaml: converted to the flattened form; content is otherwise unchanged and validates against the updated schema.
• Fixes in existing snippets: a verbalizes value that was a string instead of an array, missing required verbalizes in the OrderLineItem example, a missing list dash in a derived_by example, and a few typos.

All complete snippets in the doc and the flights example validate against the updated schema.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[kurtStirewalt]

@jochenchrist , I like this change! Please note that there is a larger ontology in examples/flights.yaml that will fail to validate if we merge this PR without updating it. Let me know if you'd like us to update it and share it with you for inclusion.

[jochenchrist]

@jochenchrist , I like this change! Please note that there is a larger ontology in examples/flights.yaml that will fail to validate if we merge this PR without updating it. Let me know if you'd like us to update it and share it with you for inclusion.

flights.yaml is now updated.

[kurtStirewalt]

LGTM