"Livia studies in the city."
Translation:Livia in urbe studet.
It would unnecessarily complicate things if they should include both consonantal I and vowel V. It is easy for anyone (and good pedagogy to expect) from students) to expect at least V/U to be written out. Further, this is common practice in printed Latin texts. If we really wanted it to be ‘authentic’, we could ask them to accept our clay tablets or papyrus sent by mail deliverers, written in classical Latin cursive.
Umm .... "clay tablets"? Papyrus, of course. Velum, given the time frame, most certainly. Scrolls of whatever kind, yes. Waxed wooden tablets, aah, now we're talking. Monumental engravings in stone, well, who can deny that? Pot shards, yeah, them too. I'm no expert, but, "clay tablets"? Isn't that more cuneiform, Akkadian, ancient Mesopotamian? Or am I wrong here?
And, yes. Some compromises with "authenticity" need to be made. [For instance, which authentic era are we taking about? Latin has a long history.] Distinct graphemes--if I am using the word correctly--for distinct consonantal and vocalic phonemes are welcomed by me.