This may be one of the areas that my opinion diverges with what may be taught by others or in lighting textbooks. I really respect tommy and others, yet my opinion on this issue is different. I have replaced many a lighting system that have spread or paths dotting the landscape, and perhaps they did provide a bridge of light. But I liked what I had accomplished after replacement far better. My customers have always echoed that sentiment.
I nearly always focus on a lighting plan that provided: safe walking on steps or paths, provided security by uplighting areas beside windows and entry points, task lighting for reading, hobbies, cooking or outdoor conversation, and then lights for accent, art, and shadow. I just don't have a category for putting lights in a landscape area just to connect to other lights. The only time that happens for me ( rarely) is when there are focus objects in the landscape area worth lighting that happen to connect the dots. and I just prefer a light to accentuate something- the home, a tree, a statue, a step, water, etc.
I hope there is room for more than one school of thought on this.