Re: shapes distinct from classes docs

On 2/5/2015 9:41, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> Last week, we discussed a version of LDOM which separates shapes from
> classes:
>
> http://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/data-shapes-primer/no-class-templates

Could you explain why one would use

sh:IssueShape  aldom:Shape  ;
     ldom:property  [
         a ldom:PropertyConstraint  ;# This type declaration is optional
         rdfs:label "state"  ;
         rdfs:comment "whether this shape has been assigned to someone."  ;
         ldom:predicate  ex:state  ;
         ldom:allowedValue  ex:unassigned  ,ex:assigned  ;
         ldom:minCount  1 ;ldom:maxCount  1
     ] ;

and not

sh:IssueShape  ldom:shapeldom:Shape  ;
     ldom:property  [
         ldom:shape ldom:PropertyConstraint  ;# This type declaration is optional
         rdfs:label "state"  ;
         rdfs:comment "whether this shape has been assigned to someone."  ;
         ldom:predicate  ex:state  ;
         ldom:allowedValue  ex:unassigned  ,ex:assigned  ;
         ldom:minCount  1 ;ldom:maxCount  1
     ] ;


(i.e. when to use rdf:type and not ldom:shape/instanceShape)? How would 
users decide?

Thanks
Holger