If you are talking about variants inside of syntax,
you are right.
There is only need for ekavian/iyekavian manual transliteration, so
there is no need for ((sr-ec::...\\sr-el::...\\ etc.)). We need only
two variants: left should be ekavian, right should be iyekavian. So,
in general, we need only ((<ekavian>\\<iyekavian)). Left variant
should be sr-ec and sr-el; right variant should be sr-jc and sr-jl.
And it should be transliterated according to Cyrillic <-> Latin rules.
I see. Would it make sense to have the common conversions between
ekavian and iyekavian be stored in the conversion tables as well? This
way you don't have to use the ((ekavian//iyekavian)) markup all the
time.
Also, user should be back to variant which (s)he
changed, not to
general page (if it is possible, of course).
User can set the preferred variant in
the preference. I think when
this is finally implemented, most user would just pick one variant and
stick to it, and only occationally would want to see how the article
looks in other variants.
--
zhengzhu