Here are the considerations from my perspective. I am laying them out for you below because I am not sure from reading your various comments whether I have succeeded in making my thinking on this clear to you. Once you’ve read what I write below, if you still think that we should use superscript glottals throughout, then that is fine with me.

1. In the IPA, a distinction is made in the way that glottalization is marked on ejective stops and the way it is marked on glottalized sonorant/resonant consonants.
a. In the case of ejective stops, the raised comma transcribed after the stop is preferred [p’, t’, k’, etc.] . Although it is possible to transcribe ejective stops with a superscript glottal this is not the preferred way to do so.
b. In the case of glottalized sonorant/resonant consonants, a superscript glottal diacritic is used and can be positioned either before or after the sonorant. So glottalized m or y, for instance, would be transcribed [y?, m?] (the question marks are supposed to be raised glottals).

2. In the Americanist tradition used in the way Moses has always been written up until now, all ejective stops and all glottalized sonorants are marked in the same way: namely, they always have a raised comma after them: [p’, t’, k’, etc., m’, l’ , y’ , etc.].

3. In the xml:ids, we can’t use raised commas so we have been using superscript glottals throughout (I think, Martin, that you wrote a little conversion for this at some point).

4. Neither the IPA nor the Americanist tradition according to which Moses has been transcribed so far use a superscript glottal for ejective stops and affricates. Therefore, I argued that we should use the raised comma representation for these sounds, and not to use the superscript glottal for ejective stops and affricates.

5. Because the Moses/Americanist tradition has up until now used the raised comma for glottalized sonorants/resonants, I also argued that we should use the raised comma for the glottalized sonorants of Moses.

6. If, however, you guys think that the raised comma representation is problematic for the search functions, then I will accept your recommendation to use the superscript glottal for the ejective stops, ejective affricates, and for the glottalized sonorants.

7. My concern for consistency is the same as yours. I believe that at the moment we have several different kinds of representations. For example, I think that there are glottalized sonorants which have the raised comma written directly above them, and others which have the raised comma written just after them. And there are clearly ejectives written both with raised comma and with superscript glottal.

8. Whatever you think is the best representation, I will be happy to check for consistency as I go through the files.