URML (open robot intent language): a validated intent layer above Autoware — request for comment

[idoco2003]

Hi Autoware community,

URML (urml.dev) is a small, Apache-2.0 language for describing robot intent: a person writes an English sentence, URML turns it into a typed primitive, validates it against the robot's declared capabilities and a safety envelope, then dispatches to whatever runs below. Autoware is named in URML's manifesto as a target, and URML's research-grade autonomous-vehicle profile was designed against Autoware's operational model, which is why I am writing.

Nothing here asks Autoware to adopt, host, or maintain anything. This is a request for comment, and genuinely a design question.

URML sits one layer above Autoware as a substrate-neutral, validated intent vocabulary. The mapping I shipped (urml.dev, RFC-0020):

• plan_path(from, to, along) is a compute verb that binds a planned trajectory; it maps onto the planning pipeline (mission -> behavior -> motion). It does not actuate.
• follow_trajectory(route, speed_envelope) is the only verb that actuates; it maps onto the control stack (pure_pursuit / MPC). The validator checks the trajectory's speed against the declared ODD cap, and that follow_trajectory consumes a plan_path-produced trajectory, before anything dispatches.
• A manifest av block declares the HD map (format-neutral; Lanelet2 is yours), the ODD, and the Minimum-Risk Maneuver.

URML is explicitly research-grade for AV (production_safety_certified: false). It does not certify autonomous-vehicle safety and makes no SOTIF / R157 claim; the value is an honest, validated, human-readable intent layer with a validate-before-actuate guarantee.

Three real questions: (1) Is the plan_path -> planning, follow_trajectory -> control mapping faithful to Autoware's architecture, or does it mis-model the mission/behavior/motion split? (2) What should a URML av manifest declare to honestly describe an Autoware deployment's ODD beyond a speed cap and regions? (3) Where is the right seam for a URML -> Autoware adapter: the trajectory ROS 2 interface, or higher?

Full write-up: https://github.com/URML-MARS/URML/blob/main/docs/rfcs/0386-autoware-outreach.md

Thanks for Autoware; an open, production-aimed AV stack is exactly the kind of substrate a neutral intent layer should be able to sit above honestly.

Ido Yahalomi (URML, greenvh@gmail.com)

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