Migrate Travel workspace address to dynamic route

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Migrates the Travel workspace-address route (TRAVEL_WORKSPACE_ADDRESS) from the legacy static backTo-based pattern to the new dynamic-route pattern, as tracked in the dynamic-route migration effort.

What changed:

• Removed the static TRAVEL_WORKSPACE_ADDRESS route (which relied on getUrlWithBackToParam + a backTo query param) and added a TRAVEL_WORKSPACE_ADDRESS entry to DYNAMIC_ROUTES with path: 'workspace-address/:domain/:policyID?', carrying domain and policyID as path params.
• Renamed the screen constant WORKSPACE_ADDRESS → DYNAMIC_WORKSPACE_ADDRESS and updated all registration points in sync: SCREENS.ts, navigation types.ts param list, linking config.ts, and the modal stack navigator (require binding + replace-animation config).
• Renamed WorkspaceAddressForTravelPage.tsx → DynamicWorkspaceAddressForTravelPage.tsx, wiring it to useDynamicBackPath and rebuilding the post-OTP "next step" route via createDynamicRoute(...getRoute(domain, policyID), backPath) instead of reading a backTo query param.
• Updated the callers/entry points (BookTravelButton.tsx, DynamicDomainSelectorPage.tsx) and the layered ADDRESS_COUNTRY / TRAVEL_TCS entryScreens references to point at the new dynamic screen.

Why the previously-claimed blocker does not apply: an earlier attempt deferred this route citing a "policyID/domain query-param collision." That was a misread of createDynamicRoute's mergeQueryStrings, which only throws on duplicate query param keys. Carrying domain/policyID as path params (exactly as the adjacent TRAVEL_TCS dynamic route already does) bypasses mergeQueryStrings entirely, so there is no collision and the route is migratable.

Fixed Issues

$ #83867
PROPOSAL:

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"
// Please describe what tests you performed that validates your changed worked.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the offline tests.

QA Steps

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the QA tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review".
// Please describe what QA needs to do to validate your changes and what areas do they need to test for regressions.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/SCREENS.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/components/BookTravelButton.tsx	2.35% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	76.92% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/Travel/DynamicDomainSelectorPage.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/ROUTES.ts	20.60% <0.00%> (ø)
...gation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx	6.53% <0.00%> (ø)
...es/Travel/DynamicWorkspaceAddressForTravelPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 15 files with indirect coverage changes

[huult]

@MelvinBot please close this PR

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Closing this PR as requested by huult.