Add missing profile specifications to ProfileIdentifierType

[goneall]

Adds operational, functional safety and service profiles

[bact]

LGTM. Do we like to add "functionalSafety and "service" here as well?

[goneall]

LGTM. Do we like to add "functionalSafety and "service" here as well?

Good catch - I'll add those to the same PR

[bact]

I just noticed that we have some inconsistencies between the model and the spec.

In the model, we have 3 licensing profiles:

1. Licensing
2. SimpleLicensing
3. ExpandedLicensing

In ProfileIdentifierType, we have 2 licensing profiles:

1. "simpleLicensing"
2. "expandedLicensing"

In the Conformance chapter of the spec, we have 1 licensing profile:

1. Licensing profile

The spec probably treat all *Licensing profiles as one.

Should we add the "licensing" entry to ProfileIdentifierType as well? To make it match the model.

Note that Licensing profile is different from almost all other profiles. It contains only profile information and contains no model part (there are no classes/properties/vocabularies in Licensing profile) -- all classes and properties used in Licensing profile conformance are from Core, Software, and SimpleLicensing profiles. Another profile that also contains no model part is the Lite profile.

[bact]

@goneall We can merge this PR as it is and manage the "licensing" entry in ProfileIdentifierType question in another PR.

Since it is about licensing, would like to hear from @swinslow too.