Scenarios should declare whether they are Baseline, Conservative, etc.

[denised]

There is no requirement that a scenario be in any specific camp, but most of them are. Adding explicit metadata would make it easier for any user interface to help users select appropriately, And if we start to have functionality that operates on a sector or global level, it would make it easy for scenarios to use the correct global assumptions.

[denised]

Also, I had added module fields PDS1, PDS2 and PDS3 to all scenarios, but I realize now that this is misleading --- these labels refer to global scenarios, and the behavior of individual solutions may be different in each. So, really, those fields should also be renamed to align.

Note: there are two very similar naming conventions that are easily confused:
Conservative/Ambitious/100%Res
Plausible/Drawdown/Optimum

The first officially refers to categorizations of sources, but tends to bleed over into the naming of scenarios.
The second is synonymous with PDS1/2/3. So I think we should use the Conservative/Ambitious labels, but I'd like to find another name for 100% because of the difficulty of using it as an identifier. "Max" seems like it might be a good choice, or maybe Ultimate.