> MvL suggested a json.bytes submodule (rather than a separate top level
> module) in the other issue and that sounds reasonable to me, especially
> since json is already implemented as a package.

I don't really find it reasonable to add a phantom module entirely for
the purpose of exposing an API more similar to the Python 2 one. I don't
think this design pattern has already been used.

If we add a json_bytes method, it will be simple enough for folks to add
the appropriate rules in their compat module (and/or for six to expose
it).