Tag trail_visibility: Proposed Improvements for this Descriptive Tag

Yes! I agree and that’s why I think Richard’s suggestions are good. That’s very similar to your Solution 1.

I think they’re both equally important because the two combined make it easier to follow the path/trail.

I have nothing against breaking down trail_visibility further into trailblazed:visibility and trail_surface_visibility. It could be useful for renderers, they might want to show an indistinct but well-signposted path differently from a well-worn but unmarked one. It’s just that I can’t see myself using trail_surface_visibility much: we’re debating edge cases here but for the vast majority of paths I imagine the value will be identical to that of trail_visibility.

That is also how I see it. I think it all boils down to the question what the key is going to be used for. What I have in mind is that hiking apps can use it to show a warning message such as “the planned route leads over faint and indistinct paths and requires good navigation skills”, general-purpose pedestrian routers can avoid them and renderers can show them less visibly. Practically, what matters most to me is if I’m going to get lost, especially if the weather takes a turn for the worse (which is when trail visibility becomes most important.)

This is directly related to the navigation skills required. (It doesn’t take navigation skills to follow a well-marked path even if it’s not visible on the ground.)