Vocabulario para la representación de datos sobre locales y zonas comerciales


Title
Vocabulario para la representación de datos sobre locales y zonas comerciales
URI
http://vocab.linkeddata.es/datosabiertos/def/comercio/tejido-comercial
Description
Vocabulario para la representación de datos sobre locales y zonas comerciales Este vocabulario ha sido desarrollado en el contexto del grupo sobre Turismo, Cultura y Ocio, y Comercio de AENOR. El estado del vocabulario es todavía muy inicial y sufrirá cambios Reutiliza términos de varios vocabularios y modelos que actualmente se utilizan para propósitos similares (y por tanto se irá actualizando de acuerdo con la evolución de estos vocabularios), incluyendo: - schema.org (concretamente LocalBusiness) - geoNames Esta ontología sufrirá cambios continuados hasta que se consiga un acuerdo suficiente sobre los términos que se incluyen en ella.
License
Creative Commons CC-BY
Languages
es

The following evaluation results have been generated by the RESTFul web service provided by OOPS! (OntOlogy Pitfall Scanner!). OOPS! is a software on development, and we will be happy to receive your feedbak. If you notice any issue in the evaluation, please contact us at oops@delicias.dia.fi.upm.es.

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

Evaluation results

P08. Missing annotations4 cases detected. 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].

This pitfall affects to the following ontology elements:

P10. Missing disjointness ontology *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

P11. Missing domain or range in properties2 cases detected. Important

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

This pitfall affects to the following ontology elements:

P13. Inverse relationships not explicitly declared5 cases detected. 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 affects to the following ontology elements:

P40. Namespace hijacking1 case detected. 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 affects to the following ontology elements:


References: