Choosing which language to transliterate from. Using a Russian name for an Ukrainian city has certain connotations, using an Ukrainian name has other.
The city is called Киев in Russian, Київ in Ukrainian. I think that both sides would agree that “Kiev” is the correct English transliteration of Киев, and “Kyiv” is the correct English transliteration of Київ. The question is not how to transliterate, but what to transliterate.
The thing I complained about is that each side has several different norms how to transliterate their language. For “Киев” the choices are “Kiev” or “Kiyev”, and for “Київ” it is “Kyiv” or “Kyjiv”.
(In Slovak we have already used “Kyjev”, which sounds like a compromise, so maybe we will keep it.)
Alternative romanizations used in English-language sources include Kyïv (according to the ALA–LC romanization used in bibliographic cataloguing), Kyjiv (scholarly transliteration used in linguistics), and Kyyiv (the 1965 BGN/PCGN transliteration standard).
I would expect that choosing either of those will also get you into problems because it differs from the official transliteration.
Choosing which language to transliterate from. Using a Russian name for an Ukrainian city has certain connotations, using an Ukrainian name has other.
The city is called Киев in Russian, Київ in Ukrainian. I think that both sides would agree that “Kiev” is the correct English transliteration of Киев, and “Kyiv” is the correct English transliteration of Київ. The question is not how to transliterate, but what to transliterate.
The thing I complained about is that each side has several different norms how to transliterate their language. For “Киев” the choices are “Kiev” or “Kiyev”, and for “Київ” it is “Kyiv” or “Kyjiv”.
(In Slovak we have already used “Kyjev”, which sounds like a compromise, so maybe we will keep it.)
I would expect that choosing either of those will also get you into problems because it differs from the official transliteration.