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. 87 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://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#MetaMetadataContribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Educational
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#LifeCycleContribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#duration
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalTypicalLearningTime
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalDuration
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#lifeCycleContribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#relatedResourceDescription
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#dateTimeDescription
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#lifeCycleVersion
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalInstallationRemarks
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#taxonpathSource
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#durationDescription
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#durationValue
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#taxonEntry
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#copyrightDescription
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotationDescription
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#otherPlatformRequirements
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classificationDescription

• The following elements have no rdfs:label defined:
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Contribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#LearningObject
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#TaxonPath
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#TechnicalRequirement
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Identifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Annotation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#LangString
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Classification
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Relation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#VCard
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#DateTime
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Duration
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#SingleTechnicalRequirement
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#Taxon
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classificationTaxon
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classificationKeyword
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#taxonPath
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotationEntity
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#relation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#metaMetadataIdentifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#includesSingleLangString
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotationDate
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalRequirements
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#keyword
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasRelatedResource
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalTypicalAgeRange
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#description
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#isCompositeOf
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educational
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#identifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#contributionEntity
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classification
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#coverage
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#contributionDateTime
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasResourceIdentifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#metaMetadataContribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#lifeCycleStatus
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#cost
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasValue
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#identifierEntry
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalIntendedUserRole
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classificationPurpose
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalLocation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#metaMetadataContributionRole
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#aggregationLevel
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#identifierCatalog
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalInteractivityLevel
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalSize
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#metadataSchema
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalInteractivityType
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#copyrightAndOtherRestrictions
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#structure
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#dateTimeValue
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#orCompositeMinimumVersion
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#orCompositeType
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#orCompositeMaximumVersion
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalLanguage
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalSemanticDensity
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#lifeCycleContributionRole
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#relationKind
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#orCompositeName
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#metaMetadataLanguage
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#email
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalDifficulty
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalContext
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#taxonId
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasTechnicalFormat

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 P11: Missing domain or range in properties. 19 cases | Important Important

Object and/or datatype properties without domain or range (or none of them) are included in the ontology.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasResourceIdentifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#lifeCycleContribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#coverage
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classification
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#description
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalTypicalAgeRange
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#keyword
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalRequirements
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#includesSingleLangString
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#relation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotationEntity
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classificationKeyword
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#duration
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#taxonEntry
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotationEntity
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#copyrightAndOtherRestrictions
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasValue
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#cost

Tip: Solving this pitfall may lead to new results for other pitfalls and suggestions. We encourage you to solve all cases when needed and see what else you can get from OOPS!

Results for P13: Inverse relationships not explicitly declared. 28 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://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#duration
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalTypicalLearningTime
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classificationTaxon
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classificationKeyword
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#taxonPath
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotationEntity
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#relation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#metaMetadataIdentifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#includesSingleLangString
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotationDate
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalRequirements
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#keyword
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasRelatedResource
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalTypicalAgeRange
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#description
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#isCompositeOf
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educational
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#identifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#contributionEntity
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#classification
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#coverage
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#technicalDuration
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#annotation
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#contributionDateTime
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#lifeCycleContribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#hasResourceIdentifier
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#metaMetadataContribution
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#relatedResourceDescription

Results for P19: Defining multiple domains or ranges in properties. 2 cases | Critical Critical

The domain or range (or both) of a property (relationships and attributes) is defined by stating more than one rdfs:domain or rdfs:range statements. In OWL multiple rdfs:domain or rdfs:range axioms are allowed, but they are interpreted as conjunction, being, therefore, equivalent to the construct owl:intersectionOf. This pitfall is related to the common error that appears when defining domains and ranges described in [7].

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalContext
http://data.opendiscoveryspace.eu/lom_ontology_ods.owl#educationalSemanticDensity

Results for P36: URI contains file extension. ontology* | Minor Minor

This pitfall occurs if file extensions such as ".owl", ".rdf", ".ttl", ".n3" and ".rdfxml" are included in an ontology URI. This pitfall is related with the recommendations provided in [9].

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

Results for P40: Namespace hijacking. 8 cases | Critical Critical

It refers to reusing or referring to terms from another namespace that are not defined in such namespace. This is an undesirable situation as no information can be retrieved when looking up those undefined terms. This pitfall is related to the Linked Data publishing guidelines provided in [11]: "Only define new terms in a namespace that you control" and to the guidelines provided in [5].

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://creativecommons.org/ns#license
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/issued
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/modified
http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#dataPropertyDomain
http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#dataPropertyRange
http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#FN
http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#ORG
http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#N

• For detecting this pitfall we rely on TripleChecker. See more results at TripleChecker website. Up to now this pitfall is only available for the "Scanner by URI" option.


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


Critical pitfalls were found
<p>
<a href="http://oops.linkeddata.es"><img
	src="http://oops.linkeddata.es/resource/image/oops_critical.png"
	alt="Critical 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