Rename "nominal_value" of Flow

[p-snft]

For Flow, we have the keyword nominal_value. I think, the capacity of a Flow (e.g. a power line) is actually easier to interpret as the "nominal value". Actually, I have been asked that quite some times. If we have a nominal_capacity of a Flow, it would be arguable why it's nominal_storage_capacity for the GenericStorage. So we need to say either nominal_flow_capacity which is actually redundant. In my opinion, it makes sense to call both nominal_capacity.

In fact, they are quite similar. In particular, they both accept a number (fixed capacity) or an Investment object.

[upadhayaajay]

I occasionally find it confusing; using the name nominal_value seems less intuitive. It might make more sense to name it nominal_capacity as you suggested, providing a clearer indication of its meaning. I agree with your suggestion to rename both to nominal_capacity.

_

[p-snft]

I still have to keep explaining people what the nominal_value is meant for and they just understand if I name it nominal_capacity, instead. I think, we should really do this.