[chipdart]

> Can someone briefly explain how or if adding data types to JSON - a standardized grammar - leaves something that still qualifies as JSON?

I had to scroll way down the article, passing over tons of what feel like astroturfing comments advertising a vendor and their product line, to see the very first comment pointing out the elephant in the room.

I agree, whatever it's described in the blog post is clearly not JSON. It's a data interchange format, and it might be mappable to JSON under the right circumstances, but JSON it is not. It's not even a superset or a subset.

I mean, by the same line of reasoning both toml, CSV, and y'all are JSON. Come on. Even BSON is described as a different format that can be transcoded to JSON.

The article reads like a cheap attempt to gather attention to a format that otherwise would not justify it.

[TRiG_Ireland]

I don't think it's a data interchange format at all. It's entirely internal to the ClickHouse database. But it supports JSON semantics in a way that databases generally don't.