Simplify data filter property names

[cdavernas]

Many thanks for submitting your Pull Request ❤️!

Please specify parts of this PR update:

• Specification
• Schema
• Examples
• Extensions
• Roadmap
• Use Cases
• Community
• TCK
• Other

Discussion or Issue link:
#672

What this PR does / why we need it:
Simplifies data filter property names, which are uselessly verbose

Special notes for reviewers:
The change applies to all concepts, except for the callbackState which exposes two filters at top level (stateDataFilter and eventDataFilter), which should anyways disapear if we go through with atomic produce/consume actions. If we keep the callbackState, we should then move the eventDataFilter down an event property, to ensure coherence accross the spec.

[tsurdilo]

thanks for pr! def +1 but would like if possible to wait till we deal with callback state
what we have now (before this change) is more verbose yes but consistent across all workflow states for filters

this change even tho again +1 would put spec in an inconsistent state until like you mentioned we deal with the callback state which still with your changes includes:

   "eventDataFilter": {
            "description": "Event data filter",
            "$ref": "#/definitions/eventdatafilter"
          },
          "stateDataFilter": {
            "description": "State data filter",
            "$ref": "#/definitions/statedatafilter"
          },

Are you ok with leaving this up and then add it as soon as we figure out the callback state questions?

[cdavernas]

@tsurdilo yeah, sure! It's just a cosmetic update anyways ;)

[tsurdilo]

roadmap update reminder :)

[tsurdilo]

please update roadmap

[tsurdilo]

needs roadmap, let me know when should review again. thanks.

[cdavernas]

Will do asap, thanks!

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[cdavernas]

@tsurdilo The roadmap has finally been updated ;) Sorry for the very long delay, had forgot about the PR

[ricardozanini]

@tsurdilo can you please take a look?

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

Bug: requested changes have all been addressed but is still marked

[cdavernas]

Have to refactor that one too :(

Not surprisingly, became stale after like 2 years of sitting here

[ricardozanini]

Closed as part of #843