One nagging issue I'd like to see fixed: where we have distances for routes or route segments, identify them as "approx." or "est." distances. That acknowledges the imprecision inherent in how the system estimates distances, which is worse for some routes than others. One extreme example is HI 360, with a system distance about 25% shorter than the actual length. That's due to hundreds of hairpin curves, which would take hundreds of extra shaping points (not the existing two dozen labeled and shaping points, which are enough to keep the route within lateral tolerance) to bring the system distance closer to actual.
