Supplement to my earlier comment, which is awaiting moderation: I did not explain clearly enough why Serbian Latin should be an official interface choice. Serbian is one language with two standard scripts, Cyrillic and Latin. We are asking to add Latin alongside Cyrillic, not to replace the existing Cyrillic translation or change the interface for people who prefer it.

For a researcher who reads and writes primarily in Latin script, switching between a Latin-script manuscript and Zotero's Cyrillic menus and dialogs makes routine work less consistent and less comfortable. This is a practical interface choice, not a claim that one script is more correct than the other. At present, using our prepared Latin translation requires a local workaround; ordinary users cannot simply select it in Zotero, and local changes can be lost or complicated by updates. An official selectable locale would let each user choose the script they use, while Cyrillic users would see no change.

The translation is already prepared and locally tested, with review files at https://github.com/Kadzo/zotero-sr-latin-translation . We would appreciate a review and a path to making it available in Zotero without leaving a completed community translation indefinitely inaccessible to users. Could the localization team enable a separate Serbian Latin locale in Transifex and advise which locale identifier and remaining technical or review steps are required for inclusion in a future Zotero release? We are ready to maintain and correct the translation through the official workflow.

Subject: Serbian Latin still unavailable after at least two updates

Dear Zotero Team,

I am following up on the inclusion of Serbian Latin in Zotero Desktop.

Nearly a month has passed since our previous correspondence, and I have installed at least two updates during that time. However, Serbian Latin is still unavailable in the language selection — only Serbian Cyrillic is offered.

The Serbian Latin translation on Transifex is currently 100% complete, and I regularly translate newly added strings. I would therefore appreciate a concrete explanation: what is preventing Serbian Latin from being included, and what step is still missing?

If anything else needs to be translated, reviewed, or tested, please let me know. I would be happy to help and continue maintaining the translation. However, I would like to understand why it remains unavailable to users despite the time that has passed and the updates released.

Please also let me know when we can expect its inclusion, if you can provide an approximate timeframe or target release.

Thank you for your time and response.

Kind regards,
Branislav Kapetanović

But you didn't answer my question above about whether there should even be a separate locale on Transifex or if this should just be built automatically from the Cyrillic locale.

Dear Dan,

Thank you for your reply and for confirming that Serbian Latin will be included in Zotero 11.

Regarding your question, I would prefer to maintain the Latin-script version separately for now. I have previously noticed terminology inconsistencies and wording in the Cyrillic translation that does not sound entirely natural in Serbian. Automatic transliteration would carry these issues over into the Latin-script version.

If automatic transliteration were necessary, I would first need to review the entire Cyrillic translation, compare it with the Latin-script version, and prepare the necessary corrections. This would be a substantial additional task. Only after that review and alignment of the translations could we consider such an approach.

It would also be important to agree on an ongoing review process so that future changes to the Cyrillic source do not reintroduce terminology inconsistencies into both versions. For these reasons, separate maintenance currently seems the safer way to preserve the quality of the Latin-script translation. I am happy to continue maintaining it regularly on Transifex.

I apologize for posting the same message in multiple places. I will keep any further discussion in this thread.

Kind regards,
Branislav Kapetanović

Dear Dan,

Thank you for your concrete proposal and your offer to prepare the comparison. This approach would work for me.

Please send me the list of differences, showing the current Cyrillic translation alongside my Latin translation converted to Cyrillic. If possible, please also include the English source text, the string identifier, and the corresponding filename so that I can reliably check the meaning and context.

I would review these entries carefully, file by file, correct any transliteration errors, and ensure consistent terminology before the changes are applied. Further corrections could then be made to the Cyrillic source as we find them.

Please let me know how you would send me the comparison files and how I should return the reviewed changes. Exchanging the files by email would work well for me, so please confirm whether that would also suit you and which address I should send the completed files to. If you prefer another method or a particular file format, please let me know.

Thank you for your help.

Kind regards,
Branislav Kapetanović

Dear Dan,

I have replied to your email and returned the reviewed spreadsheet with the corrected Cyrillic translations.

In my email, I also clarified my suggestion to prepare the Cyrillic translation and a checked Latin-script version together, keeping both consistent and avoiding transliteration errors.

Thank you for your help and cooperation.

Kind regards,
Branislav Kapetanović