role types as classes or named individuas?

Looking at https://github.com/dandi/schema/blob/master/terms/RoleType.yaml I see that the what I think of as `rdfs:subClassOf` `dandi:RoleType` is being modelled as `@type` which usually winds up implying that the uri refers to an `owl:NamedIndividual`, so for example we model `:Researcher` as an `owl:Class`, but I think `dandi:Researcher` would wind up being an `owl:NamedIndividual`? This may be an impedance mismatch between a pure rdf and an owl data model. Thoughts?

edit: similar issue with RelationType, modelling data vs modelling the entities in the world. It seems that the `dandi:` space is modelling the structure of the data and that we would have to lift those ids to the class level to get an owl representation?