The tag implication #37557 barefoot -> feet has been approved.

Reason: Barefoot needs a foot to be bare, I should hope.

EDIT: The tag implication barefoot -> feet (forum #303934) has been approved by @Millcore.

barefoot -feet has over 37,000 results. Incredible.

Sounds logical, why hasn't it been done before? I can't think of any reasons it wouldn't work.

EDIT: should hindpaw also imply feet?

I'm not sure if this implication would be correct, since a character with paws could also be barefoot.

d.d.m. said:
I'm not sure if this implication would be correct, since a character with paws could also be barefoot.

That's what I thought at first, but it seems like feet covers everything foot-like. It was also discussed on a request to imply foot_focus -> feet.

From the wiki:
"The most common types of feet include humanoid feet, paws, and hooves. Although other types of feet exist such as webbed feet and the foot structure of birds."

Having paws count as feet seems unusual to me, but it does make sense. If that is the case, I feel that hindpaws should also be implicated feet.

I'm not familiar enough with the discussions around these feet implications, but I'll change my meh-vote to an upvote.

d.d.m. said:
Having paws count as feet seems unusual to me, but it does make sense. If that is the case, I feel that hindpaws should also be implicated feet.

I'm not familiar enough with the discussions around these feet implications, but I'll change my meh-vote to an upvote.

Having hindpaws implicate feet would follow along with the wiki, and most issues caused by it are already solved by other foot tags, like humanoid_feet.

I'm not sure why the various types of feet wouldn't imply feet. Since they are feet.

The tag implication barefoot -> feet (forum #303934) has been approved by @Millcore.