tlc3 scheme -> scheme-small?

I constructed (script attached) a scheme with the tlc3 packages from
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/latex3/tagging-project/refs/heads/main/_data/tagging-status.yml
and added collection-latex (the core packages), which are
inconsequential for the size. Unfiltered, the result is (not
surprisingly) about 1.7GB.

I manually removed a bunch of font and other "multilingual" packages,
reducing the installed size to 230MB.  (Exclusions listed in the script below.)

That is only a tiny bit larger than the existing scheme-small for the
Mac "BasicTeX" (223MB), so I compared the two schemes. The most
significant (in size) is that s-small contains xetex. Attached below as
comm output, first column is packages only in s-small, second column are
those only in s-tlc3. Other than that, the additional packages in
s-small are small in size and seem rather useful, on the whole.  (As one
would hope. :) The biggest package only in s-tlc3 is tex4ht (~50MB).

My first reaction is that instead of making users pick between two
similar sets of packages (on what basis?), we could add the tlc3
packages to s-small (assuming Dick and Herb are ok with that).  The
total size would then be increased to ~313MB, but that still seems
pretty "small" to me.  Admittedly we couldn't say that every package in
the scheme is described in tlc3 (only the converse), but the benefit of
not creating yet another scheme outweighs that in my mind.

Wdyt? --thanks, karl.