> RFC 7159 not only specifies that all of the digits carry information, it specified exactly what information they carry. Can you quote? I don't see where it

> RFC 7159 not only specifies that all of the digits carry information, it specified exactly what information they carry. Can you quote? I don't see where it does, except by reference to common knowledge. But I should clarify. There are several inefficiencies in JSON numeric representation which may or may not be considered significant by an application. The ones I can think of, in order from "obviously not" to "well, maybe": 1. the case of "e" vs. "E" 2. the optional "+" sign after "e" or "E" 3. presence/absence of decimal point and/or E-notation (shouldn't make a difference, but does in many parsers, such as Python's) 4. the value of the exponent itself (e.g. 3.14 vs. 314e-2) 5. "-" sign in front of any number with a value of 0 (IEEE floats and ones-complement integers do have a negative zero) 6. excess trailing 0 digits after the decimal place (may be used to represent significant figures in scientific applications) 7. digits of lesser significance (obviously the most contentious) JavaScript ignores all but #5. Python ignores all but #3, and due to #3, sometimes #5 and #7. PostgreSQL `json` ignores none; `jsonb` ignores all but #6 and #7. Personally I would draw the line between #4 and #5. But neither the RFC nor the ECMA spec tell us.