EXPRESS_ — Constrain of-type for SimpleValue subclasses

In 9.3, SimpleValues
Unlike all of the other abstract subtypes of Instance, SimpleValue has an of-type association and none of its subclasses have specific of-type associations. This is because some SimpleValues can be values of more than one SimpleType. Accordingly, each SimpleValue subclass should have a constraint on its of-type relationships:
For LogicalValue: isIn(Core:BuiltinTypes:LOGICAL, self->of-type)
For NumberValue: isIn(Core:BuiltinTypes:NUMBER, self->of-type)
For RealValue: isIn(Core:BuiltinTypes:REAL, self->of-type)
For IntegerValue: isIn(Core:BuiltinTypes:INTEGER, self->of-type)
For StringValue: isIn(Core:BuiltinTypes:STRING, self->of-type)
For BinaryValue: isIn(Core:BuiltinTypes:BINARY, self->of-type)

The type of LogicalValues is resolved by Issue 13683.
For other SimpleValue objects, it is not a requirement that all of the possible “of-type” DataType relationships are modeled; it is only required that the “declared type” of the value is modeled. The proposed OCL rules would require that the declared type of each SimpleValue be the corresponding EXPRESS-defined SimpleType. The consensus is only to require that the value be an instance of an appropriate SimpleType: NumberValue ~ NumericType, BinaryValue ~ BinaryType, StringValue ~ StringType. These specific relationships replace the general relationship modeled as SimpleType:of-type.
Figure 20 is replaced by Issue 13683