Apparently that link was already marked as "visited" in my browser history and it seems familiar.
There seems to be a strong connection between reactive programming (especially the functional-reactive style) and Datalog. I believe that is the case because Datalog (simplification incoming) is a logic programming language that, contrary to ASP, for example, always returns a single model and can therefore always be seen as a function from input-relations (FRP cells) to output-relations where the deductive steps and intensional predicates are the streams.
The issue is - and that's not really surprising - that implementing useful call-conventions for your application on top of a datalog-engine is not easier than using a fixed call-convention (like a (f)RP-framework) and implementing your deduction with simpler semantics.
In the end, you have to bind your input and output-relations to your view and write down the rules and they are somewhat simple. With reactive programming you have a somewhat easier time binding your data to the views and the rules (functional mappings) are somewhat more difficult.
That is why I abandoned the reactive style of using Datalog as a general purpose programming language early on. If you really want to do this, you can already use differential dataflow and some plumbing code and you would not have lost a thing.
My approach is closer to Logic Production Systems.