I'm pretty sure that this ship has sailed, but for what it's worth: ṃ does not indicate a retroflex, which is what all other under-dots indicate in Skt transcription (most: we can argue about ṛ, but for this I use r̥ anyway, also for similar reasons!). Therefore it is most logical to use ṁ. (I started doing this when we used to use underlines, when all underdots disappeared unless one skipped an underline in one particular place, which was always a mess).So maybe it's only "old man yells at cloud" but I think ṁ is the logical way to go (as is r̥), and will continue to use it / them….JonathanOn Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 9:03 AM Dániel Balogh via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:Dear Harry,IAST is not an absolute standard in the way ISO-15919 is; it's more like a set of conventions, without a definitive document and hence malleable at the edges. There is, for example, no definite provision in IAST for the upadhmānīya and jihvāmūlīya (the transliterations listed on the Wikipedia page for IAST are just one of the options in use), nor for the Vedic retroflex l, much less for Dravidian retroflexes and alveolars. The same Wikipedia page gives ḻ for the retroflex l, which I have never seen before and which clashes with the convention of using ḻ for the sound in e.g. Tamiḻ.I personally have never heard of a flavour of IAST that uses an overdot for the anusvāra and agree with you that the IAST anusvāra is with an underdot. The first of two random Google hits agree: https://www.omniglot.com/writing/sanskrit.htm and https://fpmt.org/wp-content/uploads/education/translation/guide_to_sanskrit_transliteration_and_pronunciation.pdfI dare say that as far as IAST can be considered a standard, the "correct" IAST anusvāra is ṃ, while ṁ is an informal alternative. So, put in so many words, yes, Wikipedia is wrong.See also the stub on the discussion page for the IAST article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:International_Alphabet_of_Sanskrit_Transliteration#AnusvaraAll the best,DanielOn Mon, 2 Mar 2026 at 02:10, Harry Spier via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:Dear list members,I had always thought that anusvara in IAST was m with underdot (thats what GRETIL, SARIT and U ot Texas Etexts have and what I've always used) but just now looking at the wikipedia articles: Devanagari Transliteration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devanagari_transliterationBoth these articles have IAST anusvara as m overdot. Are these wikipedia articles wrong or have we all (GRETIL,SARIT, Uof Texas, me) not been using correct IAST transliteration?Thanks,Harry Spier
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
https://list.indology.info/mailman/listinfo/indology
--Prof. dr. J.A. SilkProfessor in the study of BuddhismLeiden University Institute for Area Studies, LIASHerta Mohr building 2.142Witte Singel 27A
2311 BG LeidenThe Netherlands
Guest Professor, PI of ERC-Project BEST
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Department für Asienstudien, Institut für Indologie und Tibetologie
Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1
80539 München
Deutschlandwebsite: www.OpenPhilology.eucopies of my publications may be found at