You don't need google to do this. Anyone can create a transperancy and lay it over a google map. I think it is Portland, OR that has created a bike/transit transperancy.

I wish one of the Twin City NGO's would create one.

Wny wait for Google to do it?

So, klute, are you offering to do these "transparencies" for all the US cities and towns?  Let us know if so, we could all take a number and you could generate them.  And can you explain how you're going to pay for all the web hosting needed to make these accessible to everyone and for the updates.

Someone pointed me to the Portland byCycle site--the task has apparently overwhelmed the little entity that created it, and that's before any updates.  

The question isn't "why wait for Google," it's "How do you get Google or Mapquest to realize what an opportunity already exists?"
Both businesses are in the business of providing a service in order to attract eyeballs so that advertisers will pay money -- imagine broadening the range of eyeballs from just drivers to anyone taking any form of trip, in any mode.

"An optimist is someone who thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist is someone who is afraid that the optimist is right."

some cities' public transit systems have online searches for routes, but it ain't enough... and it would be especially great for biking if the online mappers did this!!

I often have this problem; city transit maps usually don't show regular streets and web maps don't show transit routes. So you have two or three browsers open to try to figure out your route. This would make me very, very happy.

It shouldn't be too hard; MapQuest already has options that you can use to modify your route to avoid tolls, highways, etc.

Make something cheap, or make it simple.
And it will get used more often.

A lot of these mapping companies get their data from other companies like NavTeq (who dropped their "Bicycle Access" information a while ago). Also, there is little data available regarding traffic conditions on certain routes. Sure, a road could be technically bicycle- or pedestrian-friendly, but traffic along that road could make it hazardous. And it today's litigious society, if someone's killed going along a supposedly "bicycle-friendly" route, the mapping company is going to be one of the first against the wall.

Also, what some people consider a safe route others would consider a death trap. And what some people would consider an easy route others would consider too difficult. In short, bicycles are not the type of vehicles for which hard-and-fast data can be acquired.

Icelander,

You are correct that there is sometimes a lot of variation in what would appear to be identical roads, and that differnt people have differnt tastes for what is considered acceptable riding (or walking).

That's why I suggest that the mapping service work with locals to figure out subjective ratings for each stretch of roadway that go beyond the objective rating factors.  That way, people can use the rating for roads that they are familiar with to estimate what they are likely to find on roads they don't.  

Obvious factors that go into the objective part of the rating are width (objectively measurable), the presence of segregated bike lanes or painted lanes (objectively measurable), the average speed and traffic load on the roadway (objectively measurable), number of accidents, intersections, and curb cuts (entries/exits) in the roadway (all objectively measurable).  In other words, there's an awful lot about a road that is not subjective and that probably correlates pretty darn closely to its suitability for riding.

Add to that the use of local expertise (bike transport planners, bike clubs, pedestrian advocacy groups) to flag where the objective rating for a road is too high and where some other factor confounds the rating, and you probably have a pretty useful system.

As for the legal threat, that's a bogus boogie man.  Purveyors of information aren't liable for it; people selling books on mushrooms aren't liable when someone dies from eating the wrong one; people who publish books on rafting/climbing/scuba/ etc. aren't liable when people kill themselves doing those things.  Bike clubs offer bike maps now--do you think they are courting liability?  Of course not--they offer what they offer, routes that some people have found useful for themselves.  Do you think GPS systems are liable when people wind up driving into a washed out road and drowning or that sellers of nautical charts are liable when someone grounds themselves?  (Answer:  No, they're not.)

With Google or Mapquest, the service would simply be providing data in response to the user's request:  

Tell me how I can get from A to B using (mode: foot/bike/bus/combo) with options to specify restrictions (I only want bike paths, I'm only willing to ride on roads rated "5" or better for bikes, etc.)

"An optimist is someone who thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. A pessimist is someone who is afraid that the optimist is right."

I think what you'd need to see is Google, MapQuest, and whomever else work with the American Planning Association, Dept of Transportation, and whoever else invested in walkable communities to get open standards for GIS data on street walkability and bikeability.

That way, you can allow for commercial entities to generate data for mapping services, as well as public and non-profit entities using the data they already have on streetways.

"different people have different tastes for what is considered acceptable riding (or walking)"

"Wiki-Route" anyone???

Common sense is an oxymoron...

I was thinking the exact same thing recently.  Most of the routes Google Maps gives will be impassable by bike because it favors interstates, where biking is illegal.  How hard would it be to have a "disable interstates" feature, at least?  I'll definitely drop them an email.

Mapquest has an "avoid highways" option. Currently it is a check box on the right you can select only after you get the default directions. Then hit update directions.

You do know to check with a human being if possible. all of the mapping services will     give really weird directions on occasion--have you going the wrong way down a one say street, follow a road miles past its end,  take a right turn from an exit that only allows you to move left, that sort of thing.