I know that KLM included some cuts from Wikipedia articles in their onflight system to explain sights from at least San Francisco. Not sure whether they made it scale, probably not. Lodewijk On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:13 AM, Pierre-Selim <pierre-selim(a)huard.info> wrote:

On 30 July 2017 at 23:13, Pierre-Selim <pierre-selim(a)huard.info> wrote: How heavy is Wikipedia? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

As it happens, as part of my early career in avionics, I was responsible for the software side of the flight certification of the first inflight entertainment systems, both for CAA and FAA. Unless the interpretation of regulations has significantly changed, the snapshot of Wikipedia(s) would have to be static and would need to be part of a verified release bundle. As well as testing the way any software that displays Wikipedia pages can behave, there may be issues with allowing certain formats of images or videos which may contain dead code or could potentially carry a virus, such as might happen with SVG files. Testing this might turn out to be a bit complex for the qualification process, unless they took the easy option of text-only versions. Though the entertainment system is hosted in a secure "playpen", and so by design should be unable to affect other systems, all boxes and software on the aircraft have to be tested as flightworthy and the specific configuration needs to be set down on paper, so live updates that by-pass certification are unlikely to be allowed. Consequently any version of Wikipedia used in-flight will always be lagging current events of interest. Fae On 31 July 2017 at 01:01, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote: -- faewik(a)gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae