Apparently, yes. [0]
> making things more equitable for other languages and cultures
Well, yes. People often hate how compilcated Unicode is, but they also tend to forget that even ASCII was not sufficient for writing English in a proper way. I am not by any means old, but even I still remember the period on the web when non-Unicode encodings were relatively common and how problematic it was.
And, with assumption that by “other cultures and languages” you mean non-English speaking regions: Tolerate is a wrong word. Most people are not English native speakers. If we would go the route of deciding who is tolerating who, nations using Chinese Hanzi and its derivatives would be probably the first to claim they tolerate all the others by the speakers’ headcount alone.
Moreover, deciding what is/can be executed is not so obvious in my opinion. PDFs can have JavaScript embedded, SVG too. Flash games? Python scripts on computers with python installed? It is not just the names, but the very knowledge of what can be considered “executable.”