Using Semantic Web technologies and production rules for reasoning on obligations, permissions, and prohibitions1

Abstract

Nowadays the studies on the formalization, enforcement, and monitoring of policies and norms is crucial in different fields of research and in numerous applications. ODRL 2.2 (Open Digital Right Language) is a W3C standard policy expression language formalized using semantic web technologies. It is used to represent permitted and prohibited actions over a certain asset, and obligations required to be met by parties involved in the exchange of a digital asset. In this paper, we propose to extend the model of permission and obligation proposed by ODRL 2.2 in two directions. Firstly, by inserting in the model the notion of activation event or action and by expressing event and action as complex constructs having types and application-independent properties. Secondly, by considering the temporal aspects of obligations and permissions (expiration dates and deadlines) as part of their application independent model. The operational semantics of the proposed model of obligations and permissions is specified using Discrete State Machines and is computed using a production rule system. The proposed approach has been tested by developing a framework in Java able to get as input a set of policies formalized using Semantic Web languages, and to compute their evolution in time based on the events and actions that happen in the interaction among the parties involved in the policies.

Analysis of ontologies and policy languages to represent information flows in GDPR

“…The representational power of ODRL has a few shortcomings, as described by Kebede et al [53], specially when it comes to the representation of delegation, the different semantics to represent duties or the handling of conflicts. However, there are works [39,40] on the way to formalise and harmonise the semantics of ODRL policies and constraints.…”

Governance of Autonomous Agents on the Web: Challenges and Opportunities

“…Additionally, there has been work on usage control in the form of licensing [28, 66ś68, 143], and more recently, policy languages have been used as a means to represent regulatory constraints [50,108]. The Open Digital Rights Language [64,78], although primarily designed for licensing, has been extended to cater for: access policies [133]; requests, data ofers and agreements [132]; and regulatory policies [50]. Usage control, however, often proves challenging for organisations and users, and any constraints imposed on the use of data need to ensure that policies are applied consistently across organisations and that there are robust propagation mechanisms preventing policies from becoming invalid [45,46].…”

“…However, organisations are entirely virtual and passive (i.e., shaped by their members), thus it is up to these member agents to stipulate, comply with (or violate), enforce, and evolve organisational norms. Semantic Web technologies such at ODRL [64] Normative allow for the formalisation of norms for speciic domains and purposes; hence, they can be integrated seamlessly with the more abstract MAOP abstractions for organisations and norms that are agnostic to these details.…”

Governance of Autonomous Agents on the Web: Challenges and Opportunities

“…Additionally, there has been work on usage control in the form of licensing [28,[66][67][68]143], and more recently, policy languages have been used as a means to represent regulatory constraints [50,108]. The Open Digital Rights Language [64,78], although primarily designed for licensing, has been extended to cater for: access policies [133]; requests, data offers and agreements [132]; and regulatory policies [50].…”

“…However, organisations are entirely virtual and passive (i.e., shaped by their members), thus it is up to these member agents to stipulate, comply with (or violate), enforce, and evolve organisational norms. Semantic Web technologies such at ODRL [64] allow for the formalisation of norms for specific domains and purposes; hence, they can be integrated seamlessly with the more abstract MAOP abstractions for organisations and norms that are agnostic to these details.…”