On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 08:02 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
My answer to the cluttered Email Photos album may have seemed a toss-off ("I don't need to look there"), but yours is not much less so: you wouldn't have one at all (or would have an empty one).All photo *attachments* will still show up in the Emailed Photos folder. Only the embedded images will go to the bit-bucket.
On the other hand I'm fully on board with the storage concern.Hallelujah, we's halfway there! :-)
I don't object at all to having such a control. Sledgehammers have their place. The good thing is that neither proposal (Drew's or mine) is incompatible with implementing yours in the shorter term. Just as we don't have to opt for stripping (or bouncing) embedded images, any group that does wouldn't need our options.I have no problem with your sig line suggestion in the earlier thread, but my concern about it stems from it being too pie-in-the-sky. Simply deleting the embedded images is a much easier thing to do and on that basis stands a much greater chance of being implemented within a reasonable timeframe.
The simplest way to kill a good idea is to pad it with "nice-to-have" features until the implementation becomes so daunting and the timeline so lengthy that the original proposal dies a natural death. I don't want to see that happen with this one.