Axis Decomposition for ODRL: Resolving Dimensional Ambiguity in Policy Constraints through Interval Semantics

Every ODRL 2.2 constraint compares a single scalar value: (leftOperand, operator, rightOperand). Five of ODRL's left operands, however, denote multi-dimensional quantities--image dimensions, canvas positions, geographic coordinates--whose specification text explicitly references multiple axes. For these operands, a single scalar constraint admits one interpretation per axis, making policy evaluation non-deterministic. We classify ODRL's left operands by value-domain structure (scalar, dimensional, concept-valued), grounded in the ODRL 2.2 specification text, and show that dimensional ambiguity is intrinsic to the constraint syntax. We present an axis-decomposition framework that refines each dimensional operand into axis-specific scalar operands and prove four properties: deterministic interpretation, AABB completeness, projection soundness, and conservative extension. Conflict detection operates in two layers: per-axis verdicts are always decidable; box-level verdicts compose through Strong Kleene conjunction into a three-valued logic (Conflict, Compatible, Unknown). For ODRL's disjunctive (odrl:or) and exclusive-or (odrl:xone) logical constraints, where per-axis decomposition does not apply, the framework encodes coupled multi-axis conjectures directly. We instantiate the framework as the ODRL Spatial Axis Profile--15 axis-specific left operands for the five affected base terms--and evaluate it on 117 benchmark problems spanning nine categories across both TPTP FOF (Vampire) and SMT-LIB (Z3) encodings, achieving full concordance between provers. Benchmark scenarios are inspired by constraints arising in cultural heritage dataspaces such as Datenraum Kultur. All meta-theorems are mechanically verified in Isabelle/HOL.

Denotational Semantics for ODRL: Knowledge-Based Constraint Conflict Detection

ODRL's six set-based operators -- isA, isPartOf, hasPart, isAnyOf, isAllOf, isNoneOf -- depend on external domain knowledge that the W3C specification leaves unspecified. Without it, every cross-dataspace policy comparison defaults to Unknown. We present a denotational semantics that maps each ODRL constraint to the set of knowledge-base concepts satisfying it. Conflict detection reduces to denotation intersection under a three-valued verdict -- Conflict, Compatible, or Unknown -- that is sound under incomplete knowledge. The framework covers all three ODRL composition modes (and, or, xone) and all three semantic domains arising in practice: taxonomic (class subsumption), mereological (part-whole containment), and nominal (identity). For cross-dataspace interoperability, we define order-preserving alignments between knowledge bases and prove two guarantees: conflicts are preserved across different KB standards, and unmapped concepts degrade gracefully to Unknown -- never to false conflicts. A runtime soundness theorem ensures that design-time verdicts hold for all execution contexts. The encoding stays within the decidable EPR fragment of first-order logic. We validate it with 154 benchmarks across six knowledge base families (GeoNames, ISO 3166, W3C DPV, a GDPR-derived taxonomy, BCP 47, and ISO 639-3) and four structural KBs targeting adversarial edge cases. Both the Vampire theorem prover and the Z3 SMT solver agree on all 154 verdicts. A key finding is that exclusive composition (xone) requires strictly stronger KB axioms than conjunction or disjunction: open-world semantics blocks exclusivity even when positive evidence appears to satisfy exactly one branch.