Overhauling validation results to get them closer to cover different types of validators

[yarikoptic]

Ref:

• Please submit pointers to your validator output formats con/validation#1

and result of our chat with @candleindark while also reviewing results of linkml validation over dandisets:

• https://github.com/dandi/dandisets-linkml-status/blob/temp-with-error-locations/dandi-reports/summary.md

Notes/TODOs:

• BREAKING CHANGE: we renamed .bids_version to more generic .standard + .standard_version
• going through the code base and harmonizing construction of those ValidationResults
  • redo Validation results refactoring: centralize results for different reused origins, use _pydantic_errors_to_validation_results more #1176 in here

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.67%. Comparing base (6aa414c) to head (62695d6).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1514      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.58%   88.67%   +0.08%     
==========================================
  Files          78       78              
  Lines       10589    10601      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits         9380     9400      +20     
+ Misses       1209     1201       -8     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	88.67% <100.00%> (+0.08%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.