[refset]

It's true that this SPARQL-inspired view of Datalog as a triplestore query language is quite a narrow interpretation compared to something closer to the academic Prolog roots like https://souffle-lang.github.io/ - what do you feel are the most important differences?

[cmrdporcupine]

Disclaimer: I'm not a Datalog expert. I do work for a company that makes a relational graph knowledge management system (RelationalAI), that has some Datalog-type aspects, but I only dabble at the front-end/query-language end of that; I work on the storage layer. I've also never used Datomic or its offshoots. Yes from what I understand, Datomic works only with binary relations. Classic Datalog can work with full n-ary relations. (However any n-ary relation can be thought of, or logically recomposed, as a series of binary relations anyways, and vice-versa)

Syntax also clearly is not the Prolog-ish syntax of Datalog "proper."

But my point above is, Datomic is but one product and implementation of these concepts. It's a wrong take to make a statement like "The problem with Datalog, and Clojure in general are the licenses"; there is a field of many products, all with multiple licenses, and also weird to make this "Clojure" swipe, when there's only tangential connection between "Datalog" and "Clojure" based on one product (and its offshoots).

[refset]

Thanks for the insights and clarifications - I agree with all that completely :)

I mainly responded because "Datomic ∈ Datalog" is worthy of discussion in itself ...but I now realise this is probably the wrong subthread for that.