Diego Collarana

Daham M. Mustafa, Christoph Lange, Giancarlo Guizzardi et al.

ODRL policy evaluators produce verdicts, but say nothing about the normative positions a policy brings into existence, the authority structures those positions presuppose, or who holds the power to declare a norm violated. We formulate the Cross-Level Design Principle: any normative language with violable, consequential norms requires both conduct-level positions (Permission, Duty, Right, No right) and competence-level positions (Power, Subjection, Immunity, Disability). Applying this to ODRL, we establish that prohibition is sanctioned (violation possible and consequential), that permission is underspecified across its behaviour parameter (open vs. closed world), and that the formal semantics covers achievement obligations only. We ground ODRL in UFO-L, mapping each activated rule to a simple legal relator and extending coverage from two to eight legal positions; violation-declaration authority, implicit in every existing evaluator, becomes an explicit Power-Subjection pair. All axioms are mechanically verified in Isabelle/HOL and across a 39-problem benchmark under Vampire, E, and Z3.

Daham M. Mustafa, Diego Collarana, Sabrina Kirrane et al.

In the Open Digital Rights Language (ODRL), temporal constraints range over two sorts, instants and durations, but the comparison operators do not distinguish them. The same operator thus means "earlier instant" or "shorter duration," leaving conflict detection between two policies unsound. We resolve this by sort stratification: each temporal operand is typed to one of two ordered domains, points in time or amounts of time. Each constraint then denotes an interval, and conflict reduces to interval comparison under a three-valued verdict (Conflict, Compatible, Unknown). We characterise the check's decidability across a static and a runtime fragment, prove it sound, and evaluate it on a benchmark of policy problems compiled to TPTP and SMT-LIB, available as an artefact.