TDDonto2: A Test-Driven Development Plugin for Arbitrary TBox and ABox Axioms

  • Kieren Davies
  • C. Maria Keet
  • Agnieszka Ławrynowicz
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10577)


Ontology authoring is a complex task where modellers rely heavily on the automated reasoner for verification of changes, using effectively a time-consuming test-last approach. Test-first with Test-Driven Development aims to speed up such processes, but tools to date covered only a subset of possible OWL 2 DL axioms and provide limited feedback. We have addressed these issues with a model for TDD testing to give more feedback to the modeller and seven new, generic, TDD algorithms that also cover OWL 2 DL class expressions on the left-hand side of inclusions and ABox assertions by availing of several reasoner methods. The model and algorithms have been implemented as a Protégé plugin, TDDonto2.



This work has been partially supported by the National Science Centre, Poland, within grant 2014/13/D/ST6/02076. A. Ławrynowicz acknowledges support from grant 09/91/DSPB/0627.


  1. 1.
    Beck, K.: Test-Driven Development: By Example. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davies, K.: Towards test-driven development of ontologies: an analysis of testing algorithms. Project report, University of Cape Town (2016).
  3. 3.
    Denaux, R., Thakker, D., Dimitrova, V., Cohn, A.G.: Interactive semantic feedback for intuitive ontology authoring. In: Proceedings of FOIS 2012, pp. 160–173. IOS Press (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ferré, S., Rudolph, S.: Advocatus diaboli – exploratory enrichment of ontologies with negative constraints. In: ten Teije, A., et al. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7603, pp. 42–56. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Iqbal, R., Murad, M.A.A., Mustapha, A., Sharef, N.M.: An analysis of ontology engineering methodologies: a literature review. Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 6(16), 2993–3000 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Keet, C.M., Ławrynowicz, A.: Test-driven development of ontologies. In: Sack, H., Blomqvist, E., d’Aquin, M., Ghidini, C., Ponzetto, S.P., Lange, C. (eds.) ESWC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9678, pp. 642–657. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Keet, C.M., Khan, M.T., Ghidini, C.: Ontology authoring with FORZA. In: Proceedings of CIKM 2013, pp. 569–578. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Matentzoglu, N., Vigo, M., Jay, C., Stevens, R.: Making entailment set changes explicit improves the understanding of consequences of ontology authoring actions. In: Blomqvist, E., Ciancarini, P., Poggi, F., Vitali, F. (eds.) EKAW 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10024, pp. 432–446. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  9. 9.
    OWL API. Accessed 1 Nov 2016
  10. 10.
    Scone Project. Accessed 9 May 2016
  11. 11.
    Vigo, M., Bail, S., Jay, C., Stevens, R.D.: Overcoming the pitfalls of ontology authoring: strategies and implications for tool design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 72(12), 835–845 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Warrender, J.D., Lord, P.: How, what and why to test an ontology. In: Bio-ontologies 2015 (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kieren Davies
    • 1
  • C. Maria Keet
    • 1
  • Agnieszka Ławrynowicz
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Cape TownCape TownSouth Africa
  2. 2.Institute of Computing SciencePoznan University of TechnologyPoznańPoland

Personalised recommendations