Understanding Node vs Property Shapes and Property Paths

Hello,

Since people here have been so helpful in the past, I thought I would ask a
few more questions.

Background to this is my SO question at
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61323857/what-is-the-difference-between-these-shape-graphs-which-use-shor

The SO question has the data graph under consideration.

In the book Validating RDF, it says:

Node shapes declare constraints directly on a node. Property shapes declare
constraints on the values associated with a node through a path.


Based on this, I believe I want to use a Property Shape because I want to
define a constraint on the value of the rdf:type path on a focus node. Is
this correct?

If I try the property shape:

@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix rdf:  <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix sch:  <http://schema.org/> .
@prefix sh:   <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix ex:   <http://example.org/> .

ex:ClassOrProperty
    a sh:PropertyShape ;
    sh:target [
        a sh:SPARQLTarget ;
        sh:select   """
                    SELECT ?this
                    WHERE {
                        ?this ?p ?o .
                    }
                    """ ;
    ] ;


    sh:path [sh:zeroOrMorePath rdf:type] ;
    sh:in ( rdfs:Class rdf:Property ) ;
.


I get the unexpected validation error:
(J)

Constraint Violation in InConstraintComponent (
http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#InConstraintComponent):
Severity: sh:Violation
Source Shape: ex:ClassOrProperty
Focus Node: hr:Longer
Value Node: hr:Employee
Result Path: [ sh:zeroOrMorePath rdf:type ]


The way I thought [sh:zeroOrMorePath rdf:type] ; would work is that it
would consider the node hr:Longer and follow the rdf:type path through
hr:Employee to where it terminates at rdfs:Class and then validate.
However, it seems to stop one step away, sees that hr:Employee is not a
rdfs:Class or rdf:Property and then generates a validation error.

I get another unexpected validation error:
(K)

Constraint Violation in InConstraintComponent (
http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#InConstraintComponent):
Severity: sh:Violation
Source Shape: ex:ClassOrProperty
Focus Node: hr:Employee
Value Node: hr:Employee
Result Path: [ sh:zeroOrMorePath rdf:type ]


I was thinking that the zero in sh:zeroOrMorePath would see hr:Employee a
rdfs:Class ; and validate. Is it the case that the zero in sh:zeroOrMorePath
causes a validation engine to compare a node against itself without
following or looking for the path?

I did try using sh:oneOrMorePath, but I received the validation error (J)
again, but (K) did not show up. Is the reason why (K) did not show up
because it was forced to see hr:Employee a rdfs:Class ; because of the one
in sh:oneOrMorePath and could validate it?

Perhaps a validation engine validates every node along the path and not
just where the path terminates? If this is the case, is it possible to
validate where the path terminates only?

Needless to say, I am rather confused.

Can anyone clear this up?

Thank you,
James