A little confused. The author is arguing _against_ JSON in URLs, right? The piece starts as a list of complaints about hacky query parameter encoding, and has

A little confused. The author is arguing _against_ JSON in URLs, right? The piece starts as a list of complaints about hacky query parameter encoding, and has the feel of one of those "aren't these things annoying... but here's the right answer!" posts, except instead of a correct answer we get a discussion of how JSON is nice in some cases but we shouldn't use it in URLs, except maybe sometimes. Is this a response to some post about how JSON _should_ be used in URLs? Overall, I struggled to find a coherent narrative / argument here. Perhaps something went wrong in the article's editing process.