Rename HAIP repository to a name with working group consensus

[selfissued]

In #127 the working group was discussing what to name the HAIP repository. On the Tuesday, December 3, 2024 working group call and in #127 (comment), I advocated the name "OpenID4VC-HAIP" for the reasons stated there. Torsten supported that name and no one on the call spoke against it.

The repository was then renamed asynchronously to the working group discussion to "oid4vc-haip". I believe we should still choose a name without the defects described with that name and that has working group consensus.

I'll also note that #143 will decouple the URL at which the spec is referenced from the repository name, and so is related.

[jogu]

On the Tuesday, December 3, 2024 working group call and in #127 (comment), I advocated the name "OpenID4VC-HAIP" for the reasons stated there. Torsten supported that name and no one on the call spoke against it.

This is unfortunately not what is recorded in the minutes,
https://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs-digital-credentials-protocols/Week-of-Mon-20241202/000551.html - namely:

Repository Name Change:

• A suggestion was made to rename the repository to oid4vc-haip (#127). This change is considered straightforward and necessary.

[selfissued]

I also looked at the minutes and saw that unfortunately, that aspect of the discussion was not recorded in the minutes. You'll find it in the call recording, if you care to check my recollection. It was discussed at the very end of the call.