scanning


OOPS! is scanning...

OOPS! (OntOlogy Pitfall Scanner!) helps you to detect some of the most common pitfalls appearing when developing ontologies.

To try it, enter a URI or paste an OWL document into the text field above. A list of pitfalls and the elements of your ontology where they appear will be displayed.

Scanner by URI:

Example: http://data.semanticweb.org/ns/swc/swc_2009-05-09.rdf


Scanner by direct input:

Uncheck this checkbox if you don't want us to keep a copy of your ontology.

Evaluation results

It is obvious that not all the pitfalls are equally important; their impact in the ontology will depend on multiple factors. For this reason, each pitfall has an importance level attached indicating how important it is. We have identified three levels:

  • Critical Critical : It is crucial to correct the pitfall. Otherwise, it could affect the ontology consistency, reasoning, applicability, etc.
  • Important Important : Though not critical for ontology function, it is important to correct this type of pitfall.
  • Minor Minor : It is not really a problem, but by correcting it we will make the ontology nicer.

Results for P08: Missing annotations. 83 cases | Minor Minor

This pitfall consists in creating an ontology element and failing to provide human readable annotations attached to it. Consequently, ontology elements lack annotation properties that label them (e.g. rdfs:label, lemon:LexicalEntry, skos:prefLabel or skos:altLabel) or that define them (e.g. rdfs:comment or dc:description). This pitfall is related to the guidelines provided in [5].

• The following elements have neither rdfs:label or rdfs:comment (nor skos:definition) defined:
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#UtilityChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveContainerMembershipProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#RemoveClass
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddTypedLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSeq
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#URIReferenceNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#OntologyChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddRest
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddBag
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveURIReferenceNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#AddClass
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddURIReferenceNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveIndividualProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddIndividualProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSDatatype
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveMemberOf
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#SeeAlsoChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveSeq
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddFirst
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveList
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSContainer
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#IsDefinedByChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#MemberOfChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#NamedGraph
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSClass
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveRest
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFAlt
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveTypedLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#PlainLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveBlankNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#Node
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#RemoveProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddBlankNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddDatatype
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddContainerMembershipProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#TypedLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddList
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#AddProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFXMLLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFList
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFStatement
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveFirst
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSContainerMembershipProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#IndividualPropertyChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFBag
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#BlankNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddPlainLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#ContainerChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RestChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSResource
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddXMLLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemovePlainLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveBag
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveContainer
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveXMLLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#ListChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveIsDefinedBy
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSLiteral
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddMemberOf
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddIsDefinedBy
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#EntityChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddNode
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddSeq
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#IndividualChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveAlt
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveDatatype
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RemoveSeeAlso
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddAlt
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddSeeAlso
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#AddContainer
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#FirstChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#ReificationForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#SubjectForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#PredicateForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#ObjectForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSubject
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFPredicate
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFObject

Results for P10: Missing disjointness. ontology* | Important Important

The ontology lacks disjoint axioms between classes or between properties that should be defined as disjoint. This pitfall is related with the guidelines provided in [6], [2] and [7].

*This pitfall applies to the ontology in general instead of specific elements.

Results for P13: Inverse relationships not explicitly declared. 7 cases | Minor Minor

This pitfall appears when any relationship (except for those that are defined as symmetric properties using owl:SymmetricProperty) does not have an inverse relationship (owl:inverseOf) defined within the ontology.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#ReificationForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#SubjectForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#PredicateForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#ObjectForTriple
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFSubject
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFPredicate
http://omv.ontoware.org/2009/01/RDFSChanges#RDFObject

Results for P34: Untyped class. 7 cases | Important Important

An ontology element is used as a class without having been explicitly declared as such using the primitives owl:Class or rdfs:Class. This pitfall is related with the common problems listed in [8].

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#RemoveProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#EntityChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#OntologyChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#AddProperty
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#RemoveClass
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#IndividualChange
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#AddClass

Results for P35: Untyped property. 2 cases | Important Important

An ontology element is used as a property without having been explicitly declared as such using the primitives rdf:Property, owl:ObjectProperty or owl:DatatypeProperty. This pitfall is related with the common problems listed in [8].

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#hasRelatedEntity
http://omv.ontoware.org/2007/10/changes#appliedAxiom

Results for P38: No OWL ontology declaration. ontology* | Important Important

This pitfall consists in not declaring the owl:Ontology tag, which provides the ontology metadata. The owl:Ontology tag aims at gathering metadata about a given ontology such as version information, license, provenance, creation date, and so on. It is also used to declare the inclusion of other ontologies.

*This pitfall applies to the ontology in general instead of specific elements.

Results for P41: No license declared. ontology* | Important Important

The ontology metadata omits information about the license that applies to the ontology.

*This pitfall applies to the ontology in general instead of specific elements.


According to the highest importance level of pitfall found in your ontology the conformace bagde suggested is "Important pitfalls" (see below). You can use the following HTML code to insert the badge within your ontology documentation:


Important pitfalls were found
<p>
<a href="http://oops.linkeddata.es"><img
	src="http://oops.linkeddata.es/resource/image/oops_important.png"
	alt="Important pitfalls were found" height="69.6" width="100" /></a>
</p>


References:

  • [1] Aguado-De Cea, G., Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Poveda-Villalón, M., and Giraldo-Pasmin, O.X. (2015). Lexicalizing Ontologies: The issues behind the labels. In Multimodal communication in the 21st century: Professional and academic challenges. 33rd Conference of the Spanish Association of Applied Linguistics (AESLA), XXXIII AESLA.
  • [2] Noy, N. F., McGuinness, D. L., et al. (2001). Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology.
  • [3] Gómez-Pérez, A. (1999). Evaluation of Taxonomic Knowledge in Ontologies and Knowledge Bases. Proceedings of the Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop. Alberta, Canada.
  • [4] Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Vila Suero, D., Villazón-Terrazas, B., Dunsire, G., Escolano Rodríguez, E., Gómez-Pérez, A. (2011). Style guidelines for naming and labeling ontologies in the multilingual web.
  • [5] Vrandecic, D. (2010). Ontology Evaluation. PhD thesis.
  • [6] Gómez-Pérez, A. (2004). Ontology evaluation. In Handbook on ontologies, pages 251-273. Springer.
  • [7] Rector, A., Drummond, N., Horridge, M., Rogers, J., Knublauch, H., Stevens, R., Wang, H., and Wroe, C. (2004). Owl pizzas: Practical experience of teaching owl-dl: Common errors & common patterns. In Engineering Knowledge in the Age of the Semantic Web, pages 63-81. Springer.
  • [8] Hogan, A., Harth, A., Passant, A., Decker, S., and Polleres, A. (2010). Weaving the pedantic web. In Proceedings of the WWW2010 Workshop on Linked Data on the Web, LDOW 2010, Raleigh, USA, April 27, 2010.
  • [9] Archer, P., Goedertier, S., and Loutas, N. (2012). D7. 1.3-study on persistent URIs, with identification of best practices and recommendations on the topic for the Mss and the EC. PwC EU Services.
  • [10] Bernes-Lee Tim. (2006). “Linked Data - Design issues”. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
  • [11] Heath, T. and Bizer, C. (2011). Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space. Morgan & Claypool, 1st edition.
  • [12] Vatant, B. (2012). Is your linked data vocabulary 5-star?. http://bvatant.blogspot.fr/2012/02/is-your-linked-data-vocabulary-5-star_9588.html

Please, help us making OOPS! better. Feedback is more than welcome!
In addition, you can also suggest new pitfalls so that they can be detected in future evaluations.

Want to help?

Documentation:

Related papers:

Web services:

Developed by:

OEG logo