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. 8 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://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#endurant
http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#process
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:OrderedList
http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#perdurant
http://www.purl.org/drammar#DataStructure
http://purl.org/vocommons/voaf#Vocabulary
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:Slot
http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#state

Results for P08: Missing annotations. 34 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://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#perdurant
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:OrderedList
http://purl.org/vocommons/voaf#Vocabulary
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:Slot
http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#state
http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#process
http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#endurant
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:next
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:previous
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:item
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:slot

• The following elements have neither rdfs:comment or skos:definition defined:
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isExtRefOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasEmotionType
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isRoleOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#love_target
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isPlanEffectOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isTimelineEffectOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#happyFor_appraisingAgent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isMentalStateOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isMemberOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isTimelinePreconditionOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isKnownBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#love_appraisingAgent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasDoneState
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isOrderedBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasMentalState
http://www.purl.org/drammar#shame_target
http://www.purl.org/drammar#feels
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isPlanPreconditionOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#happyFor_target
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isSpannedBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isValueEngagedOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#shame_appraisingAgent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#quale_MWNSense

Results for P11: Missing domain or range in properties. 39 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/ontology/olo/core#olo:slot
http://www.purl.org/drammar#achieves
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isDoneStateOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#follows
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isValueEngagedOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isSpannedBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isPlanPreconditionOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#feels
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isOLEContained
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isHingedOnBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isOrderedBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasDoneState
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasPropositionalContent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isKnownBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isTimelinePreconditionOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isDescribedBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isMemberOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isDataOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasParent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isGoalOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isMentalStateOf
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:item
http://www.purl.org/drammar#target
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isTimelineEffectOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isFillerOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isPlanEffectOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isRoleOf
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:previous
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isPropositionalContentOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isIntendedBy
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isExtRefOf
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:next
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasMotivationIn
http://www.purl.org/drammar#quale_verbnetRoleLabel
http://www.purl.org/drammar#quale_framenetRoleID
http://www.purl.org/drammar#quale_YAGOSUMOConcept
http://www.purl.org/drammar#quale_MWNSense
http://www.purl.org/drammar#quale_framenetFrame
http://www.purl.org/drammar#quale

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. 22 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://www.purl.org/drammar#hasADTComponent
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:next
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasEmotionType
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:previous
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isExtRefRoleOfExtRefSchema
http://www.purl.org/drammar#love_target
http://www.purl.org/drammar#inSupportOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#target
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:item
http://www.purl.org/drammar#happyFor_appraisingAgent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#isMentalStateOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#appraisingAgent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#containsLastOLE
http://www.purl.org/drammar#love_appraisingAgent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasMentalState
http://www.purl.org/drammar#shame_target
http://www.purl.org/drammar#happyFor_target
http://www.purl.org/drammar#shame_appraisingAgent
http://www.purl.org/drammar#containsFirstOLE
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasRoot
http://www.purl.org/drammar#containsTN
http://purl.org/ontology/olo/core#olo:slot

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. 2 cases | 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://www.purl.org/drammar#TreeNode
http://www.purl.org/drammar#Scene

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://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/modified
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/issued

• 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.

SUGGESTION: symmetric or transitive object properties. 6 cases

The domain and range axioms are equal for each of the following object properties. Could they be symmetric or transitive?
http://www.purl.org/drammar#inSupportOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#inSupportOf
http://www.purl.org/drammar#precedes
http://www.purl.org/drammar#precedes
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasChild
http://www.purl.org/drammar#hasChild


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