Some days ago, we had a discussion (URDF improvements) about URDF and other description formats. As @peci1 requested, it could be convenient to bring this topic to the TSC, but before that, I think we need a consensus among experts and interested parts. I think there were different opinions in that thread and no conclusions.
I propose to organize a short-term working group to try to have a consensus about this topic. I am not an expert in URDF, but as a community rep, I will organize this working group and bring any conclusion to TSC. I would like to involve experts such as @Daniella1, @peci1, @olivier.michel, @clalancette, @traversaro, @gavanderhoorn, @kisg, @ahcorde, @davetcoleman, @jrivero, and many other people from the community that would like to participate.
I propose to start with this ST-WG the next week. This is the meeting info:
ST-WG WG about URDF / description formats 2023-04-20T17:30:00Z (1 hour)
Link to the meeting: https://meet.google.com/vqv-qevq-krr
While I used to be very involved in the URDF standard, I am unable to participate in this discussion. I’d be happy to have someone from PickNik support this effort though.
The notes and presentation of the meeting are in this folder.. Please, comment the notes to complete if something is missing.
The starting point of the work is at urdfdom repo, in a standard <simulation> tag to be accepted by simulators. (correct me if I am wrong, @clalancette)
I will try to include these auto-generation scripts in the CI in the coming days - which ideally should be triggered whenever there are changes to the ecore meta-model