I disagree, he has DONE a common data format that works.
If you do mod it, for example add comment to the data sent, 99.9% of the people agree, it is no longer JSON.
People still do it, and they still call it JSON. Heck, many JSON parsers, who otherwise work fine with regular JSON still accept it.
Even parsers using a different name like JSONC still allude to the JSON connection - and still are an argument that people found a lack in JSON.
Etymology/originology never produced much benefit over pragmatic non-prescriptive examination of how people use things. If anything, it helped confused the situation with pedantic objections.
People still do it, and they still call it JSON. Heck, many JSON parsers, who otherwise work fine with regular JSON still accept it.
Even parsers using a different name like JSONC still allude to the JSON connection - and still are an argument that people found a lack in JSON.
Etymology/originology never produced much benefit over pragmatic non-prescriptive examination of how people use things. If anything, it helped confused the situation with pedantic objections.