Here's a somewhat politically incorrect breakdown of "overall" measurements commonly used in "the industry" to flesh out what nonhacker has mentioned:

Curb to curb width - the width between the face of sidewalk curbs. Generally useful for people inside of agencies whose primary concerns are centered around automobile traffic. Less useful for almost anyone, particularly when raised medians are in place. Usually a right of way (ROW) measurement does not mean curb-to-curb although you may run into people who use it to mean this.

Right of Way - This is the measurement of the maximum amount of space that is considered "public realm", that is, not inside a parcel boundary and therefore within the purview of the local government. You could also call this a parcel line-to-parcel line measurement. This would include sidewalks, car lanes, etc. A ROW measured this way is always larger than a curb-to-curb width.

Building face to Building face - This is the measurement between the face of two buildings. It's not the same as a parcel line measurement because buildings may be set back from the parcel line, either by choice or by law. This means there is a zone at the front of the lot that may be included into the public space (by association) although it is on private land (and depending on the agreement between the city and the property owner, it could be either developed or maintained by either party). In places like downtown San Francisco, most people walking down the street will never know the real boundary between the private and public space, although I think if you pay attention closely you'll see a plaque embedded in the sidewalk that says the property owner has a right to eject anyone they feel is trespassing on their side of the line. In suburbs, the line is more defined; a house may be set back 30 feet from the front of the lot but the property line is very obviously where the lawn starts or where a white picket fence is.

The reason why anyone would care about building face to building face is how it acts as "walls" of the street and therefore affects how it feels. Personally I think it is the most useful measurement from a pedestrian standpoint, but less useful from a city standpoint, where the amount of space they're able to affect on a street is usually confined to the public ROW.

Because a building face can be right up to the property line, the building face measurement is sometimes equal to the public ROW. Note also that sometimes parts of a building can jut out into a public ROW (called an "encroachment") and this would include awnings, bay windows, etc.

I expected 66' and 100' to be on the dropdown, but maybe Vancouver's special.

We’re just getting started. What are the examples from Vancouver?

Here's a post about street ('stroad') widths: http://stroadtoboulevard.tumblr.com/post/28936446858/how-wide-are-vancouvers-streets It includes a link to VanMap which is our opendata GIS thingy.

I think 66' is standard in the West coast at least because it's a chain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_(unit). And I think the 100' is basically 99', i.e. 1.5 chains

“-to have a measurement along the bottom of the diagram showing the entire road width, or even the entire right-of-way (building to building). I feel like it really helps people have a better concept of how this space is allocated”

Integrating #30: “A nicer visual summarizing width totals, etc.”

“It would be useful to show the ROW width somewhere on the screen for the "adaptive" setting.”