fvwazing wrote:Bicycles would need so many extra connections, they would double the volume of the map where I live. All that trouble - to plan a trafficfree route for cyclists. They don't get stuck in traffic, anyway. Before they do get stuck in traffic they cut a corner over a boardwalk. Even if you managed to present them with a perfect route they would ignore it. (I know because I am a parttime cyclist myself). Not worth the trouble. Do not bother with bicycles until - well, until the last street has housenumbers (another way to say never).
Trucks would need only a handful of changes to existing roads to make them perfectly happy.
I'm still fairly new here, but I can still see a way for bicycles to be added without a lot of the unnecessary data you are envisioning. The same restrictions for trucks (streets yes/no is the primary I can think of) can be duplicated for bicycles, so there is not a lot of additional coding required.
I am not recommending that Waze be turned into a cycling app. No, no and no. I am suggesting that the data from bicycles can be taken into consideration for motorists just as the truck data being discussed. There is another discussion regarding motorcycles that reflects this, too - make sure they don't corrupt the automotive data when they are inaccurately influencing the average speed of a segment.
That some motorcyclists and bicyclists choose to ignore the rules of the road, is actually immaterial - Waze doesn't do anything of the kind with autos, why other vehicle types? Here in the USA, most states mandate that bicyclists largely follow the automotive rules when it comes to riding on streets, obeying traffic signs, signalling, etc. That doesn't stop some of them from breaking those rules, just as traffic signs don't stop drivers from speeding or performing any manner of stupid human tricks on the road.