Update NFT module with additional checks and LIP updates

[Incede]

What was the problem?

This PR partially resolves #8580

How was it solved?

Update NFT module as specified

How was it tested?

Added unit tests

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #8635 (52d1ad2) into feature/6917-implement-nft-module (70042f2) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                        Coverage Diff                         @@
##           feature/6917-implement-nft-module    #8635   +/-   ##
==================================================================
  Coverage                              83.84%   83.84%           
==================================================================
  Files                                    623      623           
  Lines                                  23159    23164    +5     
  Branches                                3348     3350    +2     
==================================================================
+ Hits                                   19417    19423    +6     
+ Misses                                  3742     3741    -1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...amework/src/modules/nft/cc_commands/cc_transfer.ts	97.43% <100.00%> (ø)
...k/src/modules/nft/commands/transfer_cross_chain.ts	97.67% <100.00%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
framework/src/modules/nft/method.ts	99.16% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[shuse2]

Token module change should be a different PR targeting release/6.0.0 branch 🙏
Assuming above, token module part is not reviewed

[mjerkov]

Looks good, as per comment I reviewed only the NFT part.

[mjerkov]

I see that some tests are failing, do you have idea why that may be?

[Incede]

I see that some tests are failing, do you have idea why that may be?

yes, the tests were failing due to the incorrect setup of context - the chain id in a command context is supposed to be the same as the own chain id but for some test cases it was not. I fixed it now. It was not detected previously as it was using the internal method getOwnChainID to get ownChainID from config rather from the context before.