> UTF-8000 is in no way endorsed by or representative of the Unicode Consortium.

Not until they decide to expand the emoji range, allocate space for all past and future fictional languages, as well as birdsong and dog barks.

Someone at the consortium is rubbing their hands with glee with all the newfound space.

But honestly, cool hack! If you invent a method to encode large numbers into bytes, why limit yourself to 24-bit numbers?

FF bytes are an easy way to identify an invalid UTF-8 file. This idea doesn't have that property.

True, but not all non-UTF8 bytestrings contain 0xFF bytes, so it’s not very useful in practice.