Fix OWL syntax of CASE datatype

[ajnelson-nist]

This Pull Request was initially applied in the same manner as in this UCO commit in support of UCO CP-90: https://github.com/ucoProject/UCO/tree/242d315f9d0d838096c57b76f5d497a75dca0d13

It is now built upon PR 102.

Coordination

• Tracking in Jira ticket ONT-467
• [x] Pull Request is against correct branch
• [x] Pull Request is in, or reverted to, Draft status before Solutions Approval vote has passed.
• [x] CI passes in CASE feature branch
• [x] CI passes in CASE current unstable branch (610279a)
• [x] Impact on SHACL validation reviewed for CASE-Examples
• [x] Impact on SHACL validation remediated for CASE-Examples
• [x] Impact on SHACL validation reviewed for casework.github.io
• [x] Impact on SHACL validation remediated for casework.github.io (N/A)
• [x] Milestone linked
• [x] Dependent UCO PR 427 is merged.
• [x] Dependent PR 102 is merged.
• [x] Solutions Approval vote logged on corresponding Issue (once logged, can be taken out of Draft PR status)

[ajnelson-nist]

Converting to Draft until Solutions Approval vote is logged.

[ajnelson-nist]

@plbt5 , @eoghanscasey - We have a conflict to resolve between Git mechanics and committee review.

UCO PR 427 was merged before the committee approval vote. This unfortunately means attempts to test the develop prerelease state (of CASE and UCO rolled together) now receive a flagging of CASE's one vocabulary in all pyshacl output. That will continue to be flagged until this PR is merged.

I request we merge this PR (CASE PR 76) into develop before the Solutions Approval vote Thursday. If the vote fails, we will revert the merge from develop.

If you both agree, please can the second of you to agree run the merge.

The consequences of not merging are:

1. SHACL validation output against develop is cluttered with one message about CASE's vocabulary. This isn't too annoying to deal with.
2. If the UCO pointer to develop gets bumped in CASE, CASE's CI will fail. This is more problematic, as it complicates most of the testing between now and Thursday, and there are still some significant changes I'm implementing and need to test.

[eoghanscasey]

@ajnelson-nist @plbt5 - I concur with the proposed approach.