I'll add to the chorus if I may. XML is much better for text documents, and very much is a first-class citizen on the web. More than anything, XML is triviall

I'll add to the chorus if I may. XML is much better for text documents, and very much is a first-class citizen on the web. More than anything, XML is trivially extensible, but anything you do with JSON for documents will require that you reinvent just about everything that XML already has (e.g., namespaces, schemas), and as with all reinventions, you'll probably do it badly. I've said elsewhere here that jq is so much pithier than XSLT, and that's true. But once you have a very complex schema to represent in JSON what would have been a simpler schema in XML, jq will no longer yield short, simple, pithy programs. The advantage of simplicity that JSON seems to have here over XML is imaginary and ephemeral -- I wouldn't count on it.