Made the labels in edit relationships tab unique

[alexandrevryghem]

Description

Currently, the relationship type labels are not unique and don't work well when the relationship type is not in the form is{Entity1}Of{Entity2}. This PR ensures they are unique by including the two entity types and the relationship type in the label.

Instructions for Reviewers

List of changes in this PR:

• Changed the way the getRelationshipMessageKey works by always forming the labels in the form: relationships.${currentEntityType}.${relationshipType}.${relatedEntityType} (both entity types are required in order to support the use case from Entities relations with invalid associations shown #1387)
• I mapped all the i18n values from the previous keys to the new keys to avoid breaking the relationship type labels in other languages
• I also changed the duplicate Publication label on the OrgUnit's edit relationship tab to: Organisation Publications & Authored Publications

Guidance for how to test or review this PR:

• Verify that all default keys are correctly translated (I only created translations for the ones defined in dspace/config/entities/relationship-types.xml)

Checklist

• My PR is created against the main branch of code (unless it is a backport or is fixing an issue specific to an older branch).
• My PR is small in size (e.g. less than 1,000 lines of code, not including comments & specs/tests), or I have provided reasons as to why that's not possible.
• My PR passes ESLint validation using yarn lint
• My PR doesn't introduce circular dependencies (verified via yarn check-circ-deps)
• My PR includes TypeDoc comments for all new (or modified) public methods and classes. It also includes TypeDoc for large or complex private methods.
• My PR passes all specs/tests and includes new/updated specs or tests based on the Code Testing Guide.
• My PR aligns with Accessibility guidelines if it makes changes to the user interface.
• My PR uses i18n (internationalization) keys instead of hardcoded English text, to allow for translations.
• My PR includes details on how to test it. I've provided clear instructions to reviewers on how to successfully test this fix or feature.
• If my PR includes new libraries/dependencies (in package.json), I've made sure their licenses align with the DSpace BSD License based on the Licensing of Contributions documentation.
• If my PR includes new features or configurations, I've provided basic technical documentation in the PR itself.
• If my PR fixes an issue ticket, I've linked them together.

[github-actions]

Hi @alexandrevryghem,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!

[tdonohue]

@alexandrevryghem : We gave this a quick group review in our Developer Meeting today. Overall, the logic here makes sense & I can understand how you'd want these i18n labels to be different for different pages/components.

The big challenge is that this touches a large number of i18n json5 files, so it's going to hit frequent merge conflicts. I think we'll need to find way to get this merge conflict free & test/merge rapidly for 9.0. I'd hesitate to backport this PR because it changes so many i18n labels, but it seems good for 9.0.

Overall, there were no objections to this approach & it makes sense. We just need to try to merge it quickly once this has merge conflicts resolved, as it will hit frequent merge conflicts.

[github-actions]

Hi @alexandrevryghem,
Conflicts have been detected against the base branch.
Please resolve these conflicts as soon as you can. Thanks!