Observation configuration needs to be more general

[eivindjahren]

When specifing which response a certain observation relates to, it should be intuitive to match agains both time series and other response types (vectors, surfaces, fields).

That is, we have extensible data types which all have a parameter, response & observation type. So for e.g. Surface there will be SurfaceParameter , SurfaceResponse and SurfaceObservation. This should be implemented in such a way that a third party may have a data type, lets say WellLog and can then plug that in as a datatype in ert and specify how to handle its parameters, responses and observations.

See #3549

[dafeda]

Is this related to #8034 perhaps @yngve-sk ?

[yngve-sk]

Yep, it will/should be pretty flexible

[eivindjahren]

@yngve-sk & @dafeda . Partially, but not completely. Let me update the issue. We closed #3549 and just kept the part that was not completed. It is not prioritized yet, so its more long term idea.