Warn instead of error when reading values invalid per the NWB schema

[ehennestad]

Fix #776

⚠️ Depends on #844 and #845.

Problem

MatNWB currently treats schema-invalid values as hard errors while reading NWB files. This is too strict: a single non-conforming value can make an otherwise usable file unreadable.

Solution

Update validators to use matnwb.common.validation.reportSchemaViolation. Schema violations remain errors during normal object construction and export, but become warnings during file reads so the original values remain accessible.

The following validators are updated in this PR:

• Neurodata type validation: checkType
• Soft-link target validation: validateSoftLink
• Data type validation: checkDtype
• Constrained data type validation: checkConstraint
• DynamicTable consistency validation: checkConfig and getOutermostIndexColumnName

Constant-value validation (checkConstant) and shape validation (validateShape) are handled separately in #845.

Tests

nwbtest('Name', 'tests.unit.types.validators.CheckTypeTest')
nwbtest('Name', 'tests.unit.types.validators.ValidateSoftLinkTest')
nwbtest('Name', 'tests.unit.types.validators.CheckDtypeTest')
nwbtest('Name', 'tests.unit.types.validators.CheckConstraintTest')
nwbtest('Name', 'tests.unit.types.validators.DynamicTableCheckConfigTest')
nwbtest('Name', 'tests.unit.io.testCreateParsedType')

Checklist

• Have you ensured the PR description clearly describes the problem and solutions?
• Have you checked to ensure that there are no other open or previously closed Pull Requests for the same change?
• If this PR fixes an issue, is the first line of the PR description Fix #XX where XX is the issue number?

🤖 Generated with Codex

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 98.50746% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 95.30%. Comparing base (94e13bc) to head (5c1ae5a).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
+types/+util/checkConstant.m	94.73%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #830      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.31%   95.30%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         218      220       +2     
  Lines        7634     7668      +34     
==========================================
+ Hits         7276     7308      +32     
- Misses        358      360       +2     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[bendichter]

decision here is to push out a fix for the problems users are facing today, specifically validation of dataset shape and schema-locked value (e.g. "volts"). Then we can perhaps think about expanding to other types of validation in the future.