They could have chosen Dhall as well, which also converts to json (or YAML). So I have to wonder: why did they choose YAML in the end? > I'd also guess that th

They could have chosen Dhall as well, which also converts to json (or YAML). So I have to wonder: why did they choose YAML in the end? > I'd also guess that the expectation was that abstractions would form around YAML to make it more powerful. Yeah, now you have 3 layers: you have an arbitrary abstraction which is likely different for every tool, then you have yaml and then you have the internal json. That seems like a loss to me in terms of complexity.