Yes, exactly. When “paving_stones” was introduced, backed by a picture and a description, it was clear this was not to be used for any kind of “surface paved with paving stones” but only for those which were considerably better for cyclists as the already common “cobblestones”, for “smooth paving”. As we already have (unhewn_)cobblestone, sett, paving_stones, concrete_lanes, grass_paver and what not as established surface values, doing it the traditional osm way would likely be to introduce yet another specific surface value for stone paving with large gaps in the surface.
Here’s the original paving stones foto from the wiki:
Some other examples for smooth paving where we use “paving_stones”
