Metadata properties listed in the following are picked from MOD1.4.
This ontology repository implements MOD1.4 but does not necessarily encode metadata with the same properties (see the used properties).
F1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier.
25.0 (60%)
16.0 (40.0%)
F1Q1 : Does the ontology have a "local" identifier, i.e., a globally unique and potentially permanent identifier assigned by the developer (or developing organization)?
9 / 9
  • Ontology URI is absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology URI is present but invalid.
    3.0
  • Ontology URI is present and valid.
    9.0
owl:ontologyIRI https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/FacilityOntology
F1Q2 : Does the ontology provide an additional "external" identifier, i.e., a guarantee globally unique and persistent identifier assigned by an accredited body? If yes, is the external identifier a DOI?
0 / 11
  • External identifier is absent.
    0.0
  • External identifier is present but invalid.
    3.0
  • External identifier is present and valid.
    6.0
  • External identifier is an invalid DOI.
    9.0
  • External identifier is a valid DOI.
    11.0
dct:identifier null
F1Q3 : Are the ontology metadata clearly identified either by the same identifier than the ontology (if included in the ontology file) or with its own globally unique and persistent identifier?
12 / 12
Ontology metadata clearly identified: the repository explicitly identifies its metadata.
  • Ontology metadata clearly identified: the repository explicitly identifies its metadata.
    12.0
F1Q4 : Does the ontology provide a version-specific URI, and is this URI resolvable?
4 / 9
  • Version URI is absent.
    0.0
  • Version URI is present but invalid.
    2.0
  • Version URI is present, valid but not resolvable.
    4.0
  • Version URI is present, valid and resolvable.
    9.0
owl:versionIRI https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/2026-04-04/FacilityOntology
F2: Ontologies are described with rich ontology metadata.
24.0 (88%)
3.0 (12.0%)
F2Q1 : Is the ontology described with additional 'MIRO must' metadata properties?
14 / 16
  • The ontology is described with 0 'MIRO must' property.
    0.0
  • The ontology is described with 1 'MIRO must' property.
    2.0
  • The ontology is described with 2 'MIRO must' properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology is described with 3 'MIRO must' properties.
    6.0
  • The ontology is described with 4 'MIRO must' properties.
    8.0
  • The ontology is described with 5 'MIRO must' properties.
    10.0
  • The ontology is described with 6 'MIRO must' properties.
    12.0
  • The ontology is described with 7 'MIRO must' properties.
    14.0
  • The ontology is described with 8 or more 'MIRO must' properties.
    16.0
omv:knownUsage null
foaf:homepage https://github.com/CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies
void:uriRegexPattern null
omv:acronym CCO-FACILITY
vann:preferredNamespaceUri null
dct:subject null
dct:coverage null
dct:audience null
foaf:page https://github.com/CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies
doap:bugDatabase https://github.com/CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies/issues
skos:hiddenLabel null
idot:exampleIdentifier null
door:comesFromTheSameDomain null
owl:backwardCompatibleWith null
vann:example null
mod:hasEvaluation null
dct:alternative null
doap:mailing-list null
dct:description The Facility Ontology module of the Common Core Ontologies designed to represent built structures and sites.
omv:resourceLocator https://raw.githubusercontent.com/CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies/master/src/cco-modules/FacilityOntology.ttl
omv:keywords null
dct:title Common Core Facility Ontology
dct:publisher null
doap:repository null
F2Q2 : Is the ontology described with additional 'MIRO should' or 'optional' metadata properties?
3 / 4
  • The ontology is described with 0 'should or optional' property.
    0.0
  • The ontology is described with 1 'should or optional' property.
    1.0
  • The ontology is described with 2 'should or optional' properties.
    2.0
  • The ontology is described with 3 'should or optional' properties.
    3.0
  • The ontology is described with 4 'should or optional' properties.
    3.0
  • The ontology is described with 5 'should or optional' properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology is described with 6 or more 'should or optional' properties.
    4.0
omv:numberOfClasses 859
omv:numberOfProperties 158
vann:preferredNamespacePrefix null
mod:metrics https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/metrics
omv:numberOfAxioms null
omv:numberOfIndividuals 81
F2Q3 : Is the ontology described with another metadata property with no explicit corresponding MIRO requirement?
7 / 7
  • The ontology is described with 0 additionnal property.
    0.0
  • The ontology is described with 1 additionnal property.
    1.0
  • The ontology is described with 2 additionnal properties.
    2.0
  • The ontology is described with 3 additionnal properties.
    3.0
  • The ontology is described with 4 additionnal properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology is described with 5 additionnal properties.
    5.0
  • The ontology is described with 6 additionnal properties.
    6.0
  • The ontology is described with 7 or more additionnal properties.
    7.0
dct:hasPart null
omv:isOfType null
omv:keyClasses null
dct:dateSubmitted 2026-06-13T18:12:10.000+00:00
dct:abstract null
mod:classesWithMoreThan25Children 2
dct:created 2026-06-13T00:00:00.000+00:00
dct:bibliographicCitation ["https://github.com/CommonCoreOntology/CommonCoreOntologies"]
pav:curatedOn null
foaf:depiction null
void:openSearchDescription https://data.dev.matportal.org/search?ontologies=CCO-FACILITY&q=
schema:comment ["This ontology is designed to represent buildings and campuses that are designed to serve some specific purpose and which are common to multiple domains."]
void:propertyPartition https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/properties
dct:valid null
void:classPartition https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/classes
mod:classesWithOneChild 87
dct:modified null
void:dataDump https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/download
foaf:logo null
void:uriLookupEndpoint https://data.dev.matportal.org/search?ontologies=CCO-FACILITY&require_exact_match=true&q=
door:hasDisparateModelling null
mod:classesWithNoDefinition 0
schema:associatedMedia null
schema:workTranslation null
voaf:usedBy null
dct:language null
mod:analytics https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/analytics
owl:incompatibleWith null
void:rootResource https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/classes/roots
mod:browsingUI http://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY
voaf:hasDisjunctionsWith null
schema:award null
voaf:toDoList null
mod:maxChildCount 57
F3: Ontology metadata clearly and explicitly include the identifier of the ontologies they describe.
21.0 (100%)
F3Q1 : Are the ontology metadata included and maintained in the ontology file?
0 / 21
This question
  • 21.0
F3Q2 : If not, are the ontology metadata described in an external file?
11 / 11
The ontology repository provides ontology metadata in an external file.
  • The ontology repository provides ontology metadata in an external file.
    11.0
F3Q3 : Does that external file explicitly link to the ontology and vice-versa?
10 / 10
Bidirectional links between the ontology and its metadata.
  • No explicit link between the ontology and its metadata and vice-versa.
    0.0
  • One explicit link between the ontology and its metadata (but no reciprocal).
    5.0
  • Bidirectional links between the ontology and its metadata.
    10.0
F4: Ontologies and ontology metadata are registered or indexed in a searchable resource typically an ontology repository.
16.0 (67%)
8.0 (33.0%)
F4Q1 : Is the ontology registered in multiple ontology 'libraries'?
0 / 6
  • The ontology is registered in 0 ontology library.
    0.0
  • The ontology is registered in 1 ontology library.
    2.0
  • The ontology is registered in 2 ontology libraries.
    4.0
  • The ontology is registered in 3 or more ontology libraries.
    6.0
schema:includedInDataCatalog null
F4Q2 : Is the ontology registered in multiple open ontology 'repositories'?
0 / 10
  • The ontology is registered in 0 ontology repository.
    0.0
  • The ontology is registered in 1 ontology repository.
    2.0
  • The ontology is registered in 2 ontology repositories.
    4.0
  • The ontology is registered in 3 ontology repositories.
    6.0
  • The ontology is registered in 4 ontology repositories.
    8.0
  • The ontology is registered in 5 or more ontology repositories.
    10.0
schema:includedInDataCatalog null
F4Q3 : Are the ontology libraries or repositories properly indexed by Web search engines?
0 / 8
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 8.0
A1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are retrievable by their identifier using a standardized communication protocol.
28.0 (65%)
15.0 (35.0%)
A1Q1 : Does the ontology URI and other identifiers, if exist, resolve to the ontology?
0 / 6
  • The ontology provides 0 resolvable identifier.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 resolvable identifier.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides 2 resolvable identifiers.
    6.0
owl:ontologyIRI https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/FacilityOntology
dct:identifier null
A1Q2 : Does the ontology URI (if metadata is included in the ontology file) or the external metadata URI resolve to the metadata record?
7 / 7
The repository provides an external metadata URI which resolves to the metadata record.
  • The repository provides an external metadata URI which resolves to the metadata record.
    7.0
A1Q3 : Do the ontology URI and the external metadata URI (if the metadata are not included in the ontology file), support content negotiation?
15 / 24
  • Ontology and its metadata do not support content negotiation.
    0.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 1 negotiation format.
    3.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 2 negotiation formats.
    6.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 3 negotiation formats.
    9.0
  • Ontology or its metadata support 4 negotiation formats.
    12.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 5 negotiation formats.
    15.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 6 negotiation formats.
    18.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 7 negotiation formats.
    21.0
  • Ontology and its metadata support 8 or more negotiation formats.
    24.0
owl:ontologyIRI https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/FacilityOntology
A1Q4 : Are the ontology and its metadata accessible through another standard protocol such as SPARQL?
6 / 6
  • The ontology is not accessible through a SPARQL endpoint.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares being accessible through a SPARQL endpoint.
    6.0
sd:endpoint ["http://sparql.bioontology.org"]
A1.1: The protocol to retrieve ontologies and ontology metadata is open, free and universally implementable.
28.0 (100%)
A1.1Q1 : Is the ontology relying on HTTP/URIs for its identification and access mechanisms?
20 / 20
The repository uses HTTP/URIs for identification and access mechanisms.
  • The repository uses HTTP/URIs for identification and access mechanisms.
    20.0
A1.1Q2 : Is the ontology access protocol open, free, and universally implementable?
4 / 4
The repository access protocols (HTTP/URIs) are open, free and universally implementable.
  • The repository access protocols (HTTP/URIs) are open, free and universally implementable.
    4.0
A1.1Q3 : If the ontology and metadata are accessible through another protocol, is that protocol open, free, and universally implementable?
4 / 4
The repository uses another protocol (SPARQL) that is open, free and universally implementable.
  • The repository uses another protocol (SPARQL) that is open, free and universally implementable.
    4.0
A1.2: The protocol to retrieve ontologies and ontology metadata supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
22.0 (100%)
A1.2Q1 : Is the ontology accessible through a protocol that supports authentication and authorization?
11 / 11
The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
  • The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
    11.0
A1.2Q2 : Are the ontology metadata accessible through a protocol that supports authentification and authorization?
11 / 11
The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
  • The repository supports authentification and authorization when an ontology has access restriction.
    11.0
A2: Ontology metadata should be accessible even when the ontology is no longer available.
20.0 (100%)
A2Q1 : Is the ontology accessible in a repository that supports versioning?
7 / 7
The repository supports versioning.
  • The repository supports versioning.
    7.0
A2Q2 : Are the ontology metadata of each version available?
5 / 5
The repository provides metadata for each version of the ontology.
  • The repository provides metadata for each version of the ontology.
    5.0
A2Q3 : Are the ontology metadata accessible even if no more versions of the ontology are available?
4 / 4
The repository provides metadata even if no more versions of the ontology are available.
  • The repository provides metadata even if no more versions of the ontology are available.
    4.0
A2Q4 : Is the status of the ontology clearly informed?
4 / 4
  • Ontology status absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology status partially specified.
    2.0
  • Ontology status fully specified.
    4.0
owl:deprecated false
omv:status production
I1: Ontologies and ontology metadata use a formal, accessible, shared and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation.
28.0 (63%)
16.0 (37.0%)
I1Q1 : What is the representation language used for ontology and ontology metadata?
18 / 18
  • Ontology knowledge representation language absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in PDF.
    5.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in TXT.
    7.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in CSV.
    9.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in XML.
    10.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in OBO.
    11.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in RDFS.
    12.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in SKOS.
    15.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented in OWL.
    18.0
omv:hasOntologyLanguage OWL
I1Q2 : Is the representation language used a W3C Recommendation?
10 / 10
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are not represented using a W3C Recommendation.
    0.0
  • Ontology and ontology metadata are represented using a W3C Recommendatione.
    10.0
omv:hasOntologyLanguage OWL
I1Q3 : Is the syntax of the ontology informed?
0 / 5
  • Ontology syntax is absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology syntax is present.
    5.0
omv:hasOntologySyntax null
I1Q4 : Is the formality level of the ontology informed?
0 / 5
  • Ontology formality level absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology formality level present.
    5.0
omv:hasFormalityLevel null
I1Q5 : Is the availability of other syntaxes/formats informed?
0 / 4
  • No information is provided about the availability of the ontology in other formats.
    0.0
  • The availability of other ontology formats is informed.
    4.0
dct:hasFormat null
dct:isFormatOf null
I2: Ontologies and ontology metadata use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles.
5.0 (15%)
17.0 (53%)
10.0 (32.0%)
I2Q1 : Does the ontology import other FAIR vocabularies?
5 / 5
  • The ontology does not import other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology imports other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    5.0
owl:imports [http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/bfo.owl, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/ExtendedRelationOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/GeospatialOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/InformationEntityOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/TimeOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/ArtifactOntology]
I2Q2 : Does the ontology reuse terms from other FAIR vocabularies (URIs)?
0 / 5
  • The ontology does not declare reusing other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares reusing terms from other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    5.0
dct:relation null
I2Q3 : If yes, does it include the minimum information for those terms?
0 / 3
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 3.0
I2Q4 : Is the ontology aligned to other FAIR vocabularies?
0 / 5
  • The ontology does not declare being aligned to other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares being aligned to other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    5.0
voaf:hasEquivalencesWith null
I2Q5 : If yes, are those alignments well represented and to unambiguous entities? If yes, are those alignements curated?
0 / 7
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 7.0
I2Q6 : Does the ontology provide metadata information about relation to or influence of other FAIR vocabularies?
0 / 2
  • The ontology does not declare influential relations to other vocabularies.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares influential relations to other vocabularies (independently of their level of FAIRness).
    2.0
schema:translationOfWork null
voaf:generalizes null
voaf:specializes null
voaf:similar null
dct:isPartOf null
I2Q7 : Does the ontology reuse standard and FAIR metadata vocabularies to describe its metadata?
0 / 5
  • The ontology does not declare reusing standards metadata vocabularies to describe its metadata.
    0.0
  • The ontology declares reusing standards metadata vocabularies (more or less 'FAIR') to describe its metadata.
    5.0
voaf:metadataVoc null
I3: Ontologies or ontology metadata include qualified references to other (meta)data.
7.0 (21%)
26.0 (79.0%)
I3Q1 : Does an ontology provide qualified cross-references to external resources/databases?
0 / 20
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 20.0
I3Q2 : If yes, are those cross-references well represented and to unambiguous entities?
0 / 6
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 6.0
I3Q3 : Does the ontology use valid URIs to encode some metadata values?
7 / 7
  • The ontology does not use URIs to encode metadata values.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides at least 1 metadata value encoded as URI.
    1.0
  • The ontology provides at least 2 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides at least 3 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides at least 4 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides at least 5 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    5.0
  • The ontology provides at least 6 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    6.0
  • The ontology provides at least 7 metadata values encoded as URIs.
    7.0
dct:hasPart null
owl:imports [http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/bfo.owl, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/ExtendedRelationOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/GeospatialOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/InformationEntityOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/TimeOntology, https://www.commoncoreontologies.org/ArtifactOntology]
mod:obsoleteProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#deprecated
mod:synonymProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#altLabel
omv:hasOntologySyntax null
dct:isPartOf null
door:comesFromTheSameDomain null
mod:prefLabelProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel
dct:relation null
dct:hasVersion https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/submissions
voaf:specializes null
schema:translationOfWork null
voaf:generalizes null
door:hasDisparateModelling null
mod:hierarchyProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#subClassOf
owl:priorVersion null
dct:subject null
dct:isFormatOf null
schema:workTranslation null
voaf:usedBy null
omv:hasFormalityLevel null
dct:license https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-3.0-only.html
owl:backwardCompatibleWith null
mod:definitionProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#definition
voaf:hasEquivalencesWith null
owl:incompatibleWith null
mod:authorProperty http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator
dct:hasFormat null
voaf:hasDisjunctionsWith null
voaf:similar null
R1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attributes.
7.0 (21%)
27.0 (79.0%)
R1Q1 : Does the ontology provide information about how classes or concepts are defined?
5 / 5
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    1.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides 4 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 5 properties to inform how classes or concepts are defined.
    5.0
mod:definitionProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#definition
mod:prefLabelProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel
mod:authorProperty http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator
mod:obsoleteProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#deprecated
mod:synonymProperty http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#altLabel
R1Q2 : Does the ontology provide information about its hierarchy?
2 / 3
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about its hierarchy.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about its hierarchy.
    1.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about its hierarchy.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform about its hierarchy.
    3.0
mod:obsoleteParent null
mod:hierarchyProperty http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#subClassOf
mod:maxDepth 11
R1Q3 : How much of the ontology objects are described with labels?
0 / 7
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 7.0
R1Q4 : How much of the ontology objects are defined using a text description?
0 / 6
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 6.0
R1Q5 : How much ontology objects are defined using a property restriction or an equivalent class?
0 / 6
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 6.0
R1Q6 : How much of the ontology objects provide provenance information with annotation properties?
0 / 5
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 5.0
R1.1: Ontologies and ontology metadata are released with a clear and accessible usage license.
26.0 (70%)
11.0 (30.0%)
R1.1Q1 : Is the ontology license clearly specified, with an URI that is resolvable and supports content negotiation?
15 / 15
  • Ontology license absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology license present but not a valid URI.
    4.0
  • Ontology license present and valid but not resolvable.
    8.0
  • Ontology license present, valid, resolvable but with no content negotiation.
    12.0
  • Ontology license is clearly specified with a valid and resolvable URI that supports content negotiation.
    15.0
dct:license https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-3.0-only.html
R1.1Q2 : Are the ontology access rights specified and permissions documented?
4 / 7
  • Ontology access rights and permissions absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology access rights are clearly specified.
    4.0
  • Ontology access rights are clearly specified and permissions are documented.
    7.0
dct:accessRights public
cc:morePermissions null
R1.1Q3 : Are the ontology usage guidelines and copyright holder documented?
7 / 15
  • Ontology usage guidelines and copyright holder are absent.
    0.0
  • Ontology usage guidelines or copyright holder is absent.
    7.0
  • Ontology usage guidelines and copyright holder are present.
    15.0
cc:useGuidelines null
dct:rightsHolder Alexandru Todor
R1.2: Ontologies and ontology metadata are associated with detailed provenance.
4.0 (10%)
32.0 (84%)
2.0 (6.0%)
R1.2Q1 : Does the ontology provide information about the actors involved in its development?
0 / 8
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    3.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    5.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    7.0
  • The ontology provides 4 properties to inform about the actors involved in its development.
    8.0
schema:translator null
dct:creator null
dct:contributor null
pav:curatedBy null
R1.2Q2 : Does an ontology provide information on its general provenance?
0 / 6
  • The ontology provides O property to inform on its general provenance.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform on its general provenance.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform on its general provenance.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform on its general provenance.
    6.0
prov:wasGeneratedBy null
prov:wasInvalidatedBy null
dct:source null
R1.2Q3 : Are the accrual methods and policy of the ontology documented?
0 / 6
  • The ontology provides 0 accrual property.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 accrual property.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 accrual properties.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 3 accrual properties.
    6.0
dct:accrualPolicy null
dct:accrualMethod null
dct:accrualPeriodicity null
R1.2Q4 : Is the ontology clearly versioned with version information and links to previous versions?
4 / 4
  • The ontology provides O property to inform about versioning.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about versioning.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 or more properties to inform about versioning.
    4.0
dct:hasVersion https://data.dev.matportal.org/ontologies/CCO-FACILITY/submissions
owl:priorVersion null
owl:versionInfo Version 2.1
R1.2Q5 : Are the ontology latest changes documented?
0 / 2
This question cannot be evaluated in the repository at this time.
  • 2.0
R1.2Q6 : Are the methodology and tools used to build the ontology documented?
0 / 6
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about methodology and tools used.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about methodology and tools used.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about methodology and tools used.
    4.0
  • The ontology provides 3 properties to inform about methodology and tools used.
    6.0
omv:conformsToKnowledgeRepresentationParadigm null
omv:usedOntologyEngineeringTool null
omv:usedOntologyEngineeringMethodology null
R1.2Q7 : Is the ontology rationale documented?
0 / 4
  • The ontology provides 0 property to inform about rationale documentation.
    0.0
  • The ontology provides 1 property to inform about rationale documentation.
    2.0
  • The ontology provides 2 properties to inform about rationale documentation.
    4.0
omv:designedForOntologyTask null
mod:competencyQuestion null
R1.2Q8 : Does an ontology inform about its funding organization?
0 / 2
  • The ontology does not inform about its funding organization.
    0.0
  • The ontology informs about its funding organization.
    2.0
foaf:fundedBy null
R1.3: Ontologies and ontology metadata meet domain-relevant community standards.
6.0 (16%)
30.0 (84.0%)
R1.3Q1 : Does an ontology provide information about projects using or organizations endorsing?
0 / 10
  • The ontology does not provide information about projects or endorsing organizations.
    0.0
  • The ontology provide information about projects or endorsing organizations.
    5.0
  • The ontology provide information about projects and endorsing organizations.
    10.0
mod:ontologyInUse null
omv:endorsedBy null
R1.3Q2 : Is the ontology included in a specific community set or group?
0 / 20
  • The ontology does not provide information about its community set or group.
    0.0
  • The ontology is included in one of this groups: "WHEAT", "CROP", "INRAE".
    10.0
  • The ontology is included in the OBO library.
    15.0
  • The ontology is included in the OBO library and is part of the OBO Foundry.
    20.0
mod:group https://data.dev.matportal.org/groups/materialdigital
R1.3Q3 : Is the ontology openly and freely available?
6 / 6
  • The ontology is not openly and freely available.
    0.0
  • The ontology is openly and freely available.
    6.0
dct:accessRights public