In the value categories RFC, I proposed that the end state of the migration should be that getValue() should only be legal to call on prvalues.
As a stepping stone, to allow migrating off existing calls to getValue(), I proposed introducing getValueStrict(), which would already have the new semantics.
However, I've now reconsidered this. Any expression, whether prvalue or glvalue, has a value, so really there isn't any reason to forbid calling getValue() on glvalues. I'm therefore removing the deprecation from getValue() and transitioning existing getValueStrict() calls back to getValue().
The other "strict" accessors are a different case. setValueStrict() should only be called on prvalues because glvalues need to have a storage location associated with them; it doesn't make sense to only set a value for them. And, of course, getStorageLocationStrict() and setStorageLocationStrict() should obviously only be called on glvalues because prvalues don't have storage locations.