Now I see we even have a special tag, jsonobject which does nothing to combat this misunderstanding. The tag excerpt:
A JSON Object is a textual representation of an object in JSON format as defined by RFC 7159 section 4; it is an unordered collection of name/value pairs (called "object members"), where names are JSON Strings and values can be any JSON value.
I am left wondering how this tag differs from the existing json tag, whose excerpt seems quite similar:
The similar android-json tag:
JSON stands for (Java Script Object Notation). It is a simple and light-weight data interchange format that can be easily read by humans and machines.Android includes the org.json library which allow working efficiently with JSON. This provides easy parsing of JSON data and creating JSON strings
appears to be specific to Android.
I originally thought of making the three synonyms (namely, point jsonobject and android-json to json), but reviewing the questions, it appears as though there are many things out there called "JsonObject" or similar:
json_object class in a C library called json-c (2 questions tagged both jsonobject and c). It seems like these could be sufficiently tagged with json-c.
JSON_OBJECT function in MySQL (there was one question tagged with both jsonobjectand mysql without android or java, and I just changed that one to json).
I'm sure there are likely others, but I should think they could all be tagged with json if the fact that they are using the notation format is important to the question.
I'm not sure what exactly the best approach here is, thus I am not calling for burnination, retagging, or synonymizing. I'd like to hear the opinions of others what the appropriate course is.