The Wfprov Ontology


Title
The Wfprov Ontology
URI
http://purl.org/wf4ever/wfprov
Description
The wfprov ontology shows how to express minimal provenance information about the execution of a workflow described using the wfdesc ontology.
Languages
en
LOV page
See the entry for wfprov in LOV

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

P04. Creating unconnected ontology elements2 cases detected. Minor

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

This pitfall affects to the following ontology elements:

P08. Missing annotations33 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:

P11. Missing domain or range in properties7 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:

P12. Equivalent properties not explicitly declared2 cases detected. Important

The ontology lacks information about equivalent properties (owl:equivalentProperty) in the cases of duplicated relationships and/or attributes.

This pitfall affects to the following ontology elements:

    P13. Inverse relationships not explicitly declared42 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:

    P22. Using different naming conventions in the ontology ontology *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

    P31. Defining wrong equivalent classes2 cases detected. Critical

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

    This pitfall affects to the following ontology elements:

    P34. Untyped class7 cases detected. 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 affects to the following ontology elements:

    P35. Untyped property1 case detected. 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 affects to the following ontology elements:


    References: