Should Roman transliteration allow implicit a-chen?

EWTS's decision to allow an implicit a-chen (e.g., to allow "u" to mean \u0f68\u0f7c) means that a+yauna refers to \u0f68\u0fb1\u0f7d\u0f53 instead of \u0f68\u0fb1\u0f68\u0f74\u0f53. You should transliterate \u0f68\u0fb1\u0f68\u0f74\u0f53 as a+ya.una (though a+ya.un etc. are legal too).

ACIP requires a-chen to be explicit, making programmer's lives easier. And, arguably, nontechnical human users' lives, too.