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. 4 cases | 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://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Androgynous
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#GenderQueer
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#CulturalForm
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Context

Results for P08: Missing annotations. 45 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://dbpedia.org/ontology/Place
http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#SpatialThing
http://www.geonames.org/ontology#Feature
http://schema.org/Place

• The following elements have neither rdfs:comment or skos:definition defined:
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#GenderQueer
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Androgynous
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#auntOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasEthnicitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandDaughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sisterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandChildOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGenderSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#nephewOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#wifeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#childOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#parentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#interpersonalRelationship
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepSonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNativeLinguisticAbilitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#daughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandFatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGeographicHeritageSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#nieceOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandSonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#uncleOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#literalForm
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepParentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepSisterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandParentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepBrotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#fatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#forebearOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepChildOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#husbandOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandMotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#contraryTo
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#brotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#cousinOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasLinguisticAbilitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepDaughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#bloodRelativeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#relativeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sibling
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#motherOf

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. 62 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://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGender
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepFatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasEthnicity
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasRaceColour
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasLinguisticAbility
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#motherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sibling
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#personalProperty
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSexuality
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasActor
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#relativeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#bloodRelativeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepDaughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasLinguisticAbilitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepMotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#cousinOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#brotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#contraryTo
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandMotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#husbandOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepChildOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#forebearOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#fatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasCulturalForm
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSocialClass
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepBrotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasRaceColourSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandParentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#partnerOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepSisterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepParentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSexualitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#literalForm
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNationalitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#uncleOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandSonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#nieceOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSocialClassSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNativeLinguisticAbility
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGeographicHeritageSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandFatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#daughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNativeLinguisticAbilitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#guardianOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#personalPropertySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepSonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasReligionSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#interpersonalRelationship
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGeographicHeritage
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#parentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#childOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#wifeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#nephewOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNationality
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGenderSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandChildOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasReligion
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sisterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandDaughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasEthnicitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#auntOf

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. 64 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://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#auntOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasEthnicitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandDaughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sisterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasReligion
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandChildOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGenderSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNationality
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#nephewOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#wifeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#childOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#parentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGeographicHeritage
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#interpersonalRelationship
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasReligionSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepSonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#personalPropertySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#guardianOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNativeLinguisticAbilitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#daughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#inRole
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandFatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGeographicHeritageSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNativeLinguisticAbility
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSocialClassSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#nieceOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandSonOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#uncleOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasNationalitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#literalForm
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSexualitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepParentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#identity
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepSisterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#partnerOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandParentOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasRaceColourSelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepBrotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSocialClass
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasCulturalForm
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#fatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#forebearOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepChildOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#husbandOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#grandMotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#contraryTo
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#brotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#cousinOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepMotherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasLinguisticAbilitySelfReported
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepDaughterOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#bloodRelativeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#relativeOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasActor
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasSexuality
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#personalProperty
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#sibling
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#motherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasLinguisticAbility
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasRaceColour
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasEthnicity
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#stepFatherOf
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasGender

Results for P19: Defining multiple domains or ranges in properties. 1 case | 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://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasActor

Results for P30: Equivalent classes not explicitly declared. 1 case | Important Important

This pitfall consists in missing the definition of equivalent classes (owl:equivalentClass) in case of duplicated concepts. When an ontology reuses terms from other ontologies, classes that have the same meaning should be defined as equivalent in order to benefit the interoperability between both ontologies.

• The following classes might be equivalent:
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Sexuality, http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Gender

Results for P31: Defining wrong equivalent classes. 1 case | Critical Critical

Two classes are defined as equivalent, using owl:equivalentClass, when they are not necessarily equivalent.

• The following classes might not be equivalent:
http://www.geonames.org/ontology#Feature, http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Place

Results for P34: Untyped class. 31 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://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Concept
http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Place
http://schema.org/Place
http://www.geonames.org/ontology#Feature
http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#SpatialThing
http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos#ConceptScheme
http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#ConceptScheme
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Oxford_Movement
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#tractarianMovement
http://www.w3.org/2006/time/TemporalEntity
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#GeographicHeritage
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#SexIdentity
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#SocialClassIdentity
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Group
http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Organization
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Person
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Race
http://www.w3.org/ns/oa#Annotation
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Spiritualism
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#spiritualism
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#CulturalFormation
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#eurasianLabel
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#eurasianRace
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#SexualIdentity
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Unitarianism
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#unitarianism
http://rdfs.org/ns/void#Dataset
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#Role
http://www.w8.org/2004/02/skos/core#Concept
http://purl.org/vocommons/voaf#Vocabulary

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://www.w3.org/ns/prov#derivedFrom
http://sparql.cwrc.ca/ontologies/cwrc#hasCulturalForms

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 P40: Namespace hijacking. 3 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://creativecommons.org/ns#Jurisdiction
http://creativecommons.org/ns#attributionURL

• 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