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 P04: Creating unconnected ontology elements. 1 case | Minor Minor

Ontology elements (classes, object properties and datatype properties) are created isolated, with no relation to the rest of the ontology.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person

Results for P08: Missing annotations. 71 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://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Document
http://purl.org/dc/terms/Agent
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#Event
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Organization
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Agent
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Event
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Image
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isReferencedBy
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/based_near
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isVersionOf
http://purl.org/dc/terms/contributor
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#produced_in
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#place
http://purl.org/dc/terms/format
http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject
http://purl.org/dc/terms/references
http://purl.org/dc/terms/rights
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#product
http://purl.org/dc/terms/title
http://purl.org/dc/terms/publisher
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#agent
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#time
http://purl.org/dc/terms/relation
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#sub_event
http://purl.org/dc/terms/language
http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart
http://schemas.talis.com/2005/address/schema#localityName
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/startingPage
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/eanucc13
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/issue
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/number
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/shortDescription
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/isbn
http://purl.org/dc/terms/created
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/handle
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/lccn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/upc
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/isbn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/isbn13
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/doi
http://purl.org/dc/terms/issued
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/issn
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/eIssn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/isbn10
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/givenname
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/asin
http://purl.org/dc/terms/description
http://purl.org/dc/terms/date
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/sici
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/volume
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/gtin14
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/doi
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/coden
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/issn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/identifier
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/oclcnum
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/pmid
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/endingPage
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/eissn
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/edition
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/family_name

• The following elements have no rdfs:label defined:
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reproducedIn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reversedBy
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/subsequentLegalDecision
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/affirmedBy

• The following elements have neither rdfs:comment or skos:definition defined:
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/performer

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. 41 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://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart
http://purl.org/dc/terms/language
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#sub_event
http://purl.org/dc/terms/relation
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#time
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#agent
http://purl.org/dc/terms/publisher
http://purl.org/dc/terms/title
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#product
http://purl.org/dc/terms/rights
http://purl.org/dc/terms/references
http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject
http://purl.org/dc/terms/format
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#place
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#produced_in
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage
http://purl.org/dc/terms/contributor
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isVersionOf
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/based_near
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isReferencedBy
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/family_name
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/edition
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/endingPage
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/issn
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/doi
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/volume
http://purl.org/dc/terms/date
http://purl.org/dc/terms/description
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/givenname
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/eIssn
http://purl.org/dc/terms/issued
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/isbn
http://purl.org/dc/terms/created
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/isbn
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/number
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/issue
http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/startingPage
http://schemas.talis.com/2005/address/schema#localityName

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. 49 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.

• OOPS! has the following suggestions for the relationships without inverse:
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/translationOf could be inverse of http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reproducedIn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/interviewee could be inverse of http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/interviewer
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reversedBy could be inverse of http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/subsequentLegalDecision
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/subsequentLegalDecision could be inverse of http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/affirmedBy

• Sorry, OOPS! has no suggestions for the following relationships without inverse:
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isReferencedBy
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isPartOf
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/editorList
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/based_near
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/performer
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/authorList
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/producer
http://purl.org/dc/terms/isVersionOf
http://purl.org/dc/terms/contributor
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#produced_in
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#place
http://purl.org/dc/terms/format
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/issuer
http://purl.org/dc/terms/subject
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/director
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/editor
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/transcriptOf
http://purl.org/dc/terms/references
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reviewOf
http://purl.org/dc/terms/rights
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/status
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#product
http://purl.org/dc/terms/title
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/contributorList
http://purl.org/dc/terms/publisher
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#agent
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/organizer
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#time
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/degree
http://purl.org/dc/terms/relation
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/recipient
http://purl.org/NET/c4dm/event.owl#sub_event
http://purl.org/dc/terms/language
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/court
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/translator
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/distributor
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/owner
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/annotates
http://purl.org/dc/terms/hasPart

Results for P22: Using different naming conventions in the ontology. ontology* | Minor Minor

The ontology elements are not named following the same convention (for example CamelCase or use of delimiters as "-" or "_") . Some notions about naming conventions are provided in [2].

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

Results for P24: Using recursive definitions. 1 case | Important Important

An ontology element (a class, an object property or a datatype property) is used in its own definition. Some examples of this would be: (a) the definition of a class as the enumeration of several classes including itself; (b) the appearance of a class within its owl:equivalentClass or rdfs:subClassOf axioms; (c) the appearance of an object property in its rdfs:domain or range rdfs:range definitions; or (d) the appearance of a datatype property in its rdfs:domain definition.

• This pitfall appears in the following elements:
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Collection

SUGGESTION: symmetric or transitive object properties. 18 cases

The domain and range axioms are equal for each of the following object properties. Could they be symmetric or transitive?
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/citedBy
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/citedBy
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/translationOf
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/translationOf
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/interviewee
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/interviewee
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reproducedIn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reproducedIn
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reversedBy
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/reversedBy
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/subsequentLegalDecision
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/subsequentLegalDecision
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/affirmedBy
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/affirmedBy
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/cites
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/cites
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/interviewer
http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/interviewer


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