Contrast to #25163 (map primitive collections to another table).
Contrast also to #28688, which is about allowing primitive collections inside JSON documents.
Contrast as well to #28871, which is about allowing any unmapped value in a JSON document, not just primitives

This type of mapping doesn't involve a new table in the database but could still allow queries using the JSON query functionality of the relational database.

Notes:

• The JSON support here would be for JSON stored in a simple property, not aggregates mapped via owned types.
• Also consider other issues related to primitive collections--see label area-primitive-collections.