RecordType: "id" is actually name, should probably have QName

[bruno]

The RecordType? is currently identified by a user-specified id, which also plays the role of name.

FieldTypes? are identified by QName, RecordTypes? probably should be too. As for field types, the namespace would allow to conflictlessly [warning: this is not english] reuse existing RecordTypes?.

Probably RecordTypes? should have a system-generated id too, e.g. for storage purposes and to be able to identify RecordTypes? even when names change (seems like record types can currently not change their name, logical since it is actually an id).

[evert]

r4190

The RecordType? now contains a name (QName), which is used in the Record API.
The name is unique. And non-versionable, which means all versions of a RecordType? use the same name (similar to the name of a FieldType?).
The id of RecordType? is now a unique system-generated id.

TODO:

• Update the documentation of the Tutorial to reflect the changes.
• Update the Indexer to correctly use the name and id of a RecordType?.

[bruno]

The indexer has been adjusted in r4193.

For the documentation updates (which are broader than the tutorial, and also include javadoc, record model description and indexer docs), I created a separate issue #92.