Consider removing, maintaining, or simplifying the `tiled` and `ldtk` examples.

[rparrett]

Motivated by these PRs:

#530 Seems to fixes a real issue, but would need some work before merging (imo).
#525 Pretty sure that I looked at this once and it may have been fixing a real issue
#501 Seems to possibly do something useful, but needs work. Linked issue was vetoed, though.
#429 Adds support for tsx format, vetoed.
#405 Adds support for particular tile layouts, abandoned

Opening this so we can decide on the record what we want to do with these things and take appropriate actions in the linked PRs and not leave them in limbo forever. I am personally fine with removing them or instituting a "feature freeze" policy, with a slight preference for removing them.

[ChristopherBiscardi]

The current state is "feature freeze" afaik, so currently those issues contributing to ldtk/tiled examples would be closed as this crate isn't intended to become a tiled/ldtk integration but rather the base layer an integration could be built on top of (like bevy_ecs_tiled/ldtk). The Tiled/LDtk examples (to my knowledge) are meant to be proof-of-concept and used as runnable tests rather than full implementations.

re: removal, the only concern I have is really whether or not there are any similar examples/functionality. I don't think there is; bevy_ecs_ldtk/tiled are large projects that don't really showcase "how to integrate" and asset loading (.ldtk/.tmx) is a pretty unknown quantity for the general bevy population IMO, which tends to make simple integration examples useful I think.