Incident tag syntax breaks JSON conventions

[katsel]

One more for the bikeshed!

Syntax for tags on incidents is currently defined as

"tags": [
   {"tag": "host=foobar-sw.example.org"},
   {"tag": "location=Campus Rotvoll"},
   {"tag": "customer=himunkholmen.no"}
 ]

"tag": key is superfluous here (the parent array is already named "tags"), so using a string array

"tags": [
   "host=foobar-sw.example.org",
   "location=Campus Rotvoll",
   "customer=himunkholmen.no",
 ]

does suffice.

Still, = is not a structural character in JSON (see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159#page-5).

So, splitting the strings up into string-value members, I'm inclined to conclude that

"tags": [
  { "host": "foobar-sw.example.org" },
  { "location": "Campus Rotvoll" },
  { "customer": "himunkholmen.no" }
]

is the most JSON-y way of representing incident tags.

Note that JSON arrays are not type-specific, so the ability to have simple strings as tags is not getting lost here.

"tags": [
  { "host": "foobar-sw.example.org" },
  { "location": "Campus Rotvoll" },
  { "customer": "himunkholmen.no" },
  "a lonely string"
]

Why worry about such a minor thing like this?
Because a) consistency, and b) following standards is generally a good thing and c) quicker parsing, easier access to values, and the unhampered ability to use JSON-specific features of your coding language, database, etc on these values should you wish to do so.

[lunkwill42]

This is more or less a duplicate of #136

[lunkwill42]

Closing to avoid keeping dupes around.