Perhaps syntacticians with other theories would like to take up the debate. People will not accept NLP until disfluencies and other gaps are handled. This is more than a little bizarre. By this logic speech recognition should have sold nothing to date and even current products should be stamped as not fit for human consumption. Believe me, when you can type or speak the following to your search engine, people will forget about the disfluencies and gaps.
Parsers are too cumbersome to be made readily available to the general public.
If it is NOT superior to the others they should be able to do the same. There is something inherently wrong with the Penn Treebank standard. If this is done it Shouldn't take more than a few weeks for the programmers to convert their Parser's output into the Penn Treebank style. That is just not a big programming task. Besides the Penn Treebank II guidelines are the standards accepted by this field.