- 'अ' स्वरके एकही वर्ण चिन्ह होकर भी एक से अधिक उच्चारण होते है.  
- "गवत" शब्दामे **'ग**' मे 'अ' का पूर्णोच्चार होता है.
- **'व**' मे 'अ' का उच्चारण लंबा होता है;
- **'त**' मे 'अ' का उच्चारण अपूर्णोच्चार, निभृत स्वरुपाका होता है.यंहा **'त**' मे 'अ' स्वर सम्मिलीत है लेकीन उच्चारण अपूर्णता का भासमान प्रतीत होता है
- "सहल","सफल","चपल" यह शब्द और ऐसेही औरभी शब्द विभीन्न उच्चारोसे प्रभावित है । इन फरको का प्रभाव बतलाने के लिए नुक्त चिन्ह का उपयोग संभव नही है क्यूंकी **फ** अक्षरके इस प्रकार पांच उच्चार हो सकते है
१)**फ्** जीसमे स्वर का अभाव है
२) **फ** संपूर्ण उचार complete pronounciation
3) **फ** अपूर्णोच्चार, निभृत short pronounciation
4) **फ** दीर्घ लंबा long pronounciation
5) **फ** प्रदीर्घ अती लंबा very long pronounciation specialy happens on last alphabate in a word used in Indian Classical Music and also when some one calls a persons name this we write in Marathi "आरी**फSSSSSS**  
simillerly above five separate and additional pronounciations will happen for **फ़** with nukta  
:So effectively that means I do not have any sign in the system suggested by you for following two types
3) **फ** अपूर्णोच्चार, निभृत short pronounciation
4) **फ** दीर्घ लंबा long pronounciation  
:Simillarly there are 2 more स्वर in Marathi which usualy go unrecognised by people who donot have deep gramatical background there is word **देव** can be pronounced as **dev** so also it can be pronounced as in **deo** this pronounciation of **deo** in Marathi in between देव ,देऊ and देओ but actualy it is of them and is indipendant स्वर. Smiller one more स्वर in Marathi Language comes in word **pao** which is usualy written as in *'पाव*
but is actual pronounciation of **pao** (eg.देवा मला पाव; हे ईश्वर मुझसे प्रसन्न हो) is different स्वर than that of **वडापाव** ; here in pronounciation of पाव as in **वडापाव* **व*' is pronounced completely and there is no स्वर  
The system proposed by you is not only missing on above aspects there are several unanswered aspects that includes issues of  
- संयूक्त स्वर
- issue of sankrit two different prononciations of **कं**स where devnagari script is in adequate to write both prononciations of **कं** separately
- Usualy where **anusvara** is there common perception is that it is वर्णसंधी of **respective alphabate** and alphabate **म्** but actualy that may be a वर्णसंधी with **ङ** or **ञ** so How do you depict these pronounciations in system proposed by you
- How system suggested by you will inform me that the pronounciation is coming from which of the following उच्चारस्थानः कंठ ,जीव्हा ,टालू ,ओष्ठ etc.  
- आघात: जिन अक्षरोपर बात करते समय अधिक वजन दबाव या अक्षर जोर से बोले जाने की संभावना होती है। यह संभावना ौसी अक्षरके लिए अलग शब्द मे अलग हो सकती है।
- काळ in Marathi has got three totally meanings which are only understood from different pronounciation of **ळ** in का**ळ**.These pronounciations are **ळ** are different than length of pronounciation one का**ळ**
means black colour second का**ळ** means time and third one का**ळ** means death । तोंड **काळ** कर ; काही **काळ**-वेळ नाही ;**काळ** आला होता पण वेळ आली नव्हती
- In MarathI language previous to 1962 people used to write words like **काळ** as काळं (as colour) to differentiate specific pronounciation but this practice had to be stopped because काळं (as colour) pronounciation had **no** anunasik **अं** in the same but was being written and used to create confusion.
- Another problem while denoting old Marathi and to quite a big percentage about **kokani** language is that quite a number of word are spoken through nose but does not have anunasik per say .As a writing practice they give anusvara but this does create a new person trying to read the devenagari of konkani although it is as same as Marathi or Hindi .A kokani person will write word बेळगाव as बेळ**गां**व while writing he is writing anusvara in strict gramatical sense it is not anusvara but a nasal tone  
:I would have more no of querries and concerns ,I will return back soon on the same with proper Marathi Gramatical authority refferenc book with pronounciations involving ह ख् घ् छ झ थ ध य र ळ् and also be reddy for more querries may be coming from people with different Indian dialects.  
:All this is not to discourage you but if we have to implement a new system that needs to be taking care of all possible concerns for better apeal uasge and practice.  
Now one will say is realy that why do we need a pure phonetic standardisation and why wikipedians need to be cconcerned about the same.  
My answer is with wikipedia technology transalations from across the world languages are becoming just easily possible a reader who wants to know exact pronounciationshould get to know exact pronounciation but not only that if standardisation can make me know three different meanings of say marathi word **काळ**then only to and fro automatic translation would be possible so we do have need of standardisation.  
If real purpose of using these standard is know correct pronounciation of the word and checking up possibilities of automatic transalations then source of a sound whether it is tounge or teeth or lips or throat and how sound is being produced and that to be written in standard uniform format to its purest form is necessary then why do we dilute standards from IPA to IAST just for convinience.Factualy I am not comfortable with IPA not because it is defficult but because 1) is best in internationalisation but still not comprehensive enough to take care of all Indian pronounciations 2) and secondly we would be more comfortable with its IPA's Devanagari based Indian version  
thanks and regards  
Mahitgar १८:१७, २ नवम्बर २००७ (UTC)  
m:Project India centric Localisation of IPA
hi:Wikipedia:आंतरराष्ट्रीय उच्चारानुरूप अक्षर पद्धती भारतीयकरण
mr:विकिपीडिया:आंतरराष्ट्रीय उच्चारानुरूप अक्षर पद्धती भारतीयकरण
sa:विकिपीडिया:आंतरराष्ट्रीय उच्चारानुरूप अक्षर पद्धती भारतीयकरण
ta:Wikipedia Project India centric Localisation of IPA