Aesthetically, I consider such JSON structures degenerate. It's akin to building a ECMAScript app where every class and structure is only allowed to have one member.

If you want tagged data, why not just pick a representation that does that?

▲

foltik 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Because (imo) the goal should be to minimize overall complexity.

Pulling in XML and all of its additional complexity just to get a (debatably) cleaner way to express tagged unions doesn’t seem like a great tradeoff.

I also don’t buy the degenerate argument. XML is arguably worse here since you have to decide between attributes, child nodes, and text content for every piece of data.

	▲	phlakaton 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Depends on the application, I suppose. For OP's application, pulling in XML is no trouble and gives you a much better solution for typed unions. To get better than XML, I think you're looking at something closer to a Haskell- or LISP-embedded DSL, with obvious trade-offs when it comes to developer ecosystems and interoperability.