[Tagging] Deprecation - waterway=riverbank vs water=river

[Martin Machyna]

So who are these IT gods that say we can't deprecate waterway=riverbank, 
otherwise everything will break and world will cease to exist?

I can tell you already that even if we do it in this same moment the 
World would keep spinning, everybody would go about their business and 
as a bonus OSM would be improved.


On 12.2.21 2:21 , Tomas Straupis wrote:
> 2021-02-12, pn, 06:12 Michael Patrick <geodesy99 at gmail.com> rašė:
>>   INRE: " Coders must adapt to business requirements not the other way round."
>> See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
>>
>> Information Architecture is a two way street. Business requirements rarely
>> acknowledge the technical constraints of the software environment, so they
>> have to inform one another. And with a volunteer workforce, the coders
>> don't 'have' to listen to anybody. Which is probably a feature, not a bug in OSM.
>    Technical constraints may influence requirements, but not lead. IT
> experts usually would be people who used to be coders so they will
> know what is doable and what is not. In my practice it is usual that
> the coder would say "not possible, too hard" and then I would have to
> point the finger at this and that to show how to do it easy and
> quickly with the least amount of code possible.
>
>    Continuing with your comedy example I will give this example, which
> is 1 to 1 to "lets put all water under natural=water as that way it
> will be easier to write some queries":
>
>    "A janitor in a brewery* informs the brewmaster that from now on
> sterility will not be maintained in the brewery as that way it will be
> much easier for the janitor to do his work".
>
> * - for beer geeks: this is about brewery brewing "common" beers ;-)
>