I was thinking MTB have their own rating systems, but I guess it’s more akin to a mix of obstacles, angle, trail width etc than visibility.
I originally had hiking_difficulty as path_mobility or path_difficulty and got pushback on it. I feel like keeping these three values (along with exposure/fall_risk) with the same prefix on them makes them more discoverable / relatable.
Someone tags a path with the following and it tells a decent story:
hiking_technique
hiking_fall_risk
hiking_visibility
It’s casually walkable with trivial fall risk and excellent visibility, it’s a surefooted walk with a low chance of a long fall but good visibility, another is a use of hands with a high long fall risk and at that point I don’t care that the visibility is good, etc.
The following naming is probably more accurate, as two are more about the path itself, and the other is the technique of one way of traversing it:
hiking_technique
path_fall_risk
path_visibility
These keys do differ greatly from the current SAC based implementation of trail_visibility, but most other systems seem to have a lot in common with each other, even if there are differing levels of granularity.