Values of properties may not be expressible as literals - blurry difference between states and properties ?

Related to saref-portal#58 (closed) for example

Some properties, such as the position of a vehicle or an animal, may require to be expressed using an individual

As @bouter mentioned in saref-portal#58 (comment 3957) :

it may become necessary to extend the range of saref:hasValue from literals to URIs if the position is to be identified via an individual.

This blurs the distinction between states and properties, as states could be simply considered sa qualitative properties, and could be sub-classes of properties

Also, the pattern for States would be convenient for modeling things in SAREF4EHAW such as the Impairments (saref4ehaw#25 (closed)), Habits (saref4ehaw#24 (closed)), ChronicDisease (saref4ehaw#22 (closed)), AgeCategory (saref4ehaw#20 (closed)), activities (saref4ehaw#19) , but the word state seems weird for these situations.

Last thing, the concept of "State" is not present in any of the other IoT ontologies or data models I know of

The only impact on SAREF would be:

• allow for a OP variant of the DP saref:hasValue (option 1), or define a variant of saref:PropertyValue for qualitative properties (option 2)
• potentially: define saref:State as a subclass of saref:Property