It used to be the case that users could only supply object schema names when declaring a List of object links, hence the name objectType for the type of values in the list was appropriate.

With the introduction of lists of primitives users can now supply other (non object) types and the current name gets confusing.

I believe it is well established that elements of a Set or Dictionary are named "values" and as we probably want to reuse this property to specify their contained type as well, I believe an appropriate would be valueType (i.e. the type of the value contained in the particular collection type).

Alternatives for naming considered:

• value (to keep it simple)
• values
• itemType
• item
• items
• elementType
• element
• elements
• containedType
• contained