[Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

[Tomas Straupis]

2020-12-13, sk, 16:13 Brian M. Sperlongano rašė:
> 2019 was a turning point, and over the last two years, landuse=reservoir has
> been on a steady decline, while water=reservoir continued its rapid growth.

  New/duplicate schema with water=reservoir only launched because iD
coders decided to skip standard IT processes of product development
(or were not familiar with the basics of IT) and simply went for what
they personally liked, not what was better, and introduced
water=reservoir as the only way to tag, all this at the time when
water=reservoir usage was close to zero!

  And the only reason for change of stat starting 2019 is because
coders of iD decided to lie to the users that landuse=reservoir is
deprecated which it never was and started replacing landuse=reservoir
under their highly controversial disguise of "upgrade tags".

  So the change of statistics is not the preference of mappers but
preference of some nerds.

> Is it time to more directly recommend that mappers favor natural=water + water=reservoir
> *instead of* rather than *in addition to* landuse=reservoir?

  I would propose to deprecate water=reservoir and even more - add
guards so that such pointless/nerdy duplicate standards would not be
introduced in the future.

  Note that one of the main nerdy points of this schema was to have a
possibility to write sql easier (somebody has problems with "and/or")
and this would also require riverbanks to fall into this new water
schema. And riverbank clearly does not fall into that even with iD
lying about it too. Therefore the only point has failed and this
stupidity is spreading havoc in tagging of such prominent water
features for more than 10 years now.

P.S. There is quite an easy solution to have a separate iD instance
for beginners with correct tagging presets loaded.