No, it states that wrangling _can be_ encoding. It does not in any way state that Wuffs is actually _good_ for it at the current stage, and I do not know of any

No, it states that wrangling _can be_ encoding. It does not in any way state that Wuffs is actually _good_ for it at the current stage, and I do not know of any nontrivial encoder built with Wuffs, ever. (In contrast, there are 18 example decoders included with Wuffs. I assume you don't count the checksum functions as encoding.)