RAD-216: Remove the use of the tagged scalars take 2

[WilliamJamieson]

Resolves RAD-216

Closes #649
Closes #666

This is a second attempt at what #666 was trying to do. This makes no effort to reorganize any schemas nor does it add any new features to RAD.

This makes all the tagged scalars static schemas and removes them from common use. This is based off #687 so that its introduced unit tests could be used to identify all the tags that needed to be moved to static.

Note the changes necessary in RDM and Romancal to make their normal unit tests pass are actually quite small. However, as one can see from the regression tests: https://github.com/spacetelescope/RegressionTests/actions/runs/17336765345/job/49224272637. We run into most of the regression tests failing. Looking through the errors they all have the same theme due to type/tag mismatch, I think there are three cases:

1. The input file still has tagged scalars and so the fact that file_date is now a simple time tag, when that gets copied into the fresh new file validation fails on the final write due to a tag mismatch. This occurs when the model type gets changed by RCAL during the step execution in the regression test.
2. Similar to 1. the input file still has tagged scalars except this time the model type does not get changed during the step, but one of the tagged scalars gets updated resulting. Since the model does not get changed it stays tagged as the previous datamodel tag but now RDM does not wrap the value into the TaggedScalar so we get a tag mismatch in the opposite direction.
3. The step runs successfully, and the file validates however the deep diff with the truth fails because there are type differences due to the lack of TaggedScalar wrappers in the new output.

I am pretty sure that if we regenerate all the data files everything should be fine or possibly run create_from_model from spacetelescope/roman_datamodels#550 on all the current regression test files save over them with the result.

roman_datamodels PR spacetelescope/roman_datamodels#555
romancal PR spacetelescope/romancal#1938

Tasks

• Update or add relevant rad tests.
• Update relevant docstrings and / or docs/ page.
• Does this PR change any schema files?
  • Schema changes were discussed at RAD Review Board meeting.
• Does this PR change any API used downstream? (If not, label with no-changelog-entry-needed.)
  • Write news fragment(s) in changes/: echo "changed something" > changes/<PR#>.<changetype>.rst (see below for change types).
  • Start a romancal regression test (https://github.com/spacetelescope/RegressionTests/actions/workflows/romancal.yml) with this branch installed ("git+https://github.com/<fork>/rad@<branch>").
  • Update relevant roman_datamodels utilities and tests.

News fragment change types:

• changes/<PR#>.feature.rst: new feature
• changes/<PR#>.bugfix.rst: fixes an issue
• changes/<PR#>.doc.rst: documentation change
• changes/<PR#>.removal.rst: deprecation or removal of public API
• changes/<PR#>.misc.rst: infrastructure or miscellaneous change

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 95.23810% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 97.48%. Comparing base (db07961) to head (93a8654).
⚠️ Report is 161 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
tests/test_schemas.py	95.23%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #688      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.70%   97.48%   -0.23%     
==========================================
  Files           8        8              
  Lines         698      716      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits          682      698      +16     
- Misses         16       18       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 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.

[PaulHuwe]

Should the versions of the tagged scalars themselves be incremented? I know it isn't needed functionally, but it makes sense thematically as this is a meaningful change.

[PaulHuwe]

@WilliamJamieson and @braingram - Lets try to ensure that create_from_model gets any adjustments it needs to support converting pre-tag-removal to post.

[WilliamJamieson]

Should the versions of the tagged scalars themselves be incremented? I know it isn't needed functionally, but it makes sense thematically as this is a meaningful change.

They effectively have a "new" version because they aren't in tagged_scalars/ they are in meta/. So there is no need for a version change.

[PaulHuwe]

LGTM