test: prefer expected failures to skips in WPT status files - #65311

Review requested:

• @nodejs/web-standards

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.13%. Comparing base (30bff4a) to head (3971a94).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #65311      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.13%   90.13%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         752      752              
  Lines      251568   251568              
  Branches    47270    47286      +16     
==========================================
- Hits       226759   226757       -2     
+ Misses      16168    16154      -14     
- Partials     8641     8657      +16     

I don't see the point in unskipping

• tentatives that aren't part of the spec and are known to fail
• ones that genuinely don't make sense in node, e.g. secure contexts
• where we simply don't have the API - e.g. FileReader
• where a WPT server is needed

In general I trust the maintainers of those systems to know better and to curate their WPT expectations and wouldn't cause this churn which is also a PITA when backporting.

I'm happy to close, I figured this would be easier for the respective maintainers to identify unexpected successes or failures instead of skips