Other Sinitic languages should be included in the database

Why does a Sino-Tibetan database just have proto-Sino-Tibetan, modern Tibeto-Burman languages, ancient Chinese (old and middle) and Mandarin as the only modern Chinese form? This database completely ignores the non-Mandarin Sinitic languages. And I think modern form of non-Mandarin Sinitic languages are also important to the whole Sino-Tibetan etymology. Take "to cover" as example, I noticed that many Tibetan-Burman languages end with "m" which the Old, Middle Chinese and Mandarin in the database can't explain.
However, in Taiwanese Min and Cantonese, there's such a word that starts with a k consonant, ends with a m, and means "to cover". I especially notice "to cover" in written Burmese - khruṁ , khyuṁ  and kʻyuṁ.
In Taiwanese Min, there's "kham" meaning "to cover"
http://goo.gl/jl51J
In Cantonese, there's "k'em" that means the same thing.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6070/6044657531_653869db0b_b.jpg
It is written as 冚 in Cantonese. There's even a comment left in this dictionary site that in his/her dialect (I guess this is a Mandarin dialect), "to cover" is called "kan".
http://www.zdic.net/zd/zi/ZdicE5Zdic86Zdic9A.htm

This particular word can also be seen in Tai-Kradai languages.
In Zhuang,
goemj (见goeb) 盖;覆盖
goemq 盖;遮盖
(from Zhuang <-> Chinese dictionary http://scg.rauz.net.cn/sawl.asp?Page=3&cih=&js=%B8%C7)
In Thai,
http://www.thai-language.com/id/132874

According to the journal I posted, the Chinese character for this word is:
http://dict.variants.moe.edu.tw/yitic/frc/frc00435.htm

From here, it shows the importance of including other modern Sinitic languages in Sino-Tibetan database.