URML (substrate-neutral robot intent language) — RFC requesting feedback on Cyclone DDS RMW-substrate manifest mapping

[idoco2003]

Hi Cyclone DDS team,

URML (urml.dev) is a small, opinionated, human-readable language for describing robot intent — Apache-2.0, substrate-neutral by design. URML's ROS 2 reference runtime is RMW-agnostic; Cyclone DDS is the principal Fast DDS alternative and the default in some downstream distributions (Autoware, Foxglove). URML's manifest needs to declare Cyclone DDS as the RMW implementation explicitly for these production deployments.

This is a proposal-only RFC, posted as part of URML's Move #16 substrate-spine wave (16 engageable RFCs). Cyclone DDS is one of three Eclipse Foundation engagements in Move-16 (Cyclone DDS + Zenoh RFC-0209 + iceoryx RFC-0210); the conversation may converge to a Foundation-level discussion.

Full RFC: https://github.com/URML-MARS/URML/blob/main/docs/rfcs/0204-cyclone-dds-outreach.md

URML's EPL-2.0 → cross-citation framing at the API boundary: URML's Apache-2.0 adapter source does not embed Cyclone DDS source; URML composes at the RMW boundary cleanly.

Asks for the Eclipse Cyclone DDS maintainers:

1. RMW-implementation enum manifest field. Preferred value — rmw_cyclonedds_cpp (verbose ROS 2-side) or cyclonedds (substrate-class-side)?
2. Cyclone DDS-XML configuration reference. Should URML's manifest declare an XML reference path, or stay XML-config-agnostic?
3. Network-partition manifest field. Cyclone DDS supports partition-based topology; should URML's manifest declare partitions?
4. Performance-tier hint fields. latency-budget and throughput-budget QoS policies are Cyclone DDS strengths; should URML's manifest declare per-deployment performance hints?
5. Eclipse Foundation-level engagement. Is per-project Issue engagement the right first-contact channel, or should URML pursue an Eclipse Foundation-level project-collaboration conversation that spans Cyclone DDS + Zenoh + iceoryx?
6. Cross-citation conventions. URML proposes EPL-2.0 → API-boundary cross-citation in reference/ros2-runtime/; preferred attribution shape from the Cyclone DDS / Eclipse Foundation side?
7. Conformance listing. Would Cyclone DDS / the Eclipse Foundation consider a project link to URML's compatible-runtimes registry (RFC-0014)?
8. Anything else.

Thanks for the Eclipse Foundation DDS implementation.

Ido Yahalomi (URML maintainer, urml.dev, greenvh@gmail.com)

AI-assisted prose, maintainer-reviewed before posting (see VIBE.md). Human-only correspondence available on request.