# Aligning efforts in LD schema / ontology design + adoption

**URL:** <https://forum.solidproject.org/t/aligning-efforts-in-ld-schema-ontology-design-adoption/3174>\
**Category:** Linked Data\
**Created:** [June 4, 2020, 5:57pm UTC](https://forum.solidproject.org/t/aligning-efforts-in-ld-schema-ontology-design-adoption/3174 "2020-06-04T17:57:57Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 6

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![aschrijver](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex017/user_avatar/forum.solidproject.org/aschrijver/32/463_2.png) [@aschrijver](https://forum.solidproject.org/u/aschrijver)\
**Post date:** [June 5, 2020, 6:37am UTC](https://forum.solidproject.org/t/aligning-efforts-in-ld-schema-ontology-design-adoption/3174/6 "2020-06-05T06:37:06Z")

</div>

Do you have a good low-barrier intro on Data Shapes and how it fits into this concept? Very interested. The closed world 2 open world transition process is very important eventually.

But for me what is first and foremost priority is that I have my own application domains under control while elaborating functionality, start with minimum viable product and build out from there. When I mentioned ‘be on the same page _as much as possible_’ that last bit is important to keep things practical. The muddy, messy world ontologies are muddy and messy in their interpretations, and I (and I presume others too) don’t want to be stuck in analysis paralysis or utopic visions of interoperability that are many years away from any form of realization.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.solidproject.org/t/aligning-efforts-in-ld-schema-ontology-design-adoption/3174)._