Topics

Strip Out Embedded images #suggestion


Bruce Bowman
 

I just spent the last two hours deleting a bunch of dupe images linked to messages saying things like "me too."

And so, with some trepidation, I would like to resurrect the idea of a group option that strips embedded images from messages and does something with them besides letting them just proliferate in the Emailed Photos folder.

Thanks,
Bruce

P.S. Here's hoping the S/N ratio on this thread remains high.


YT9TP - Pedja
 

I had similar issue tonight. One user sent entire photo album to the list and each reply to his message contained the same images.
I am not quite sure how that happened.


Beth Weld
 

I vote for stripping - or at least having an option. I do not want "stuff" like that cluttering my groups - or having it waste my data allowance.
Thanks
Beth


 

Bruce,

And so, with some trepidation, I would like to resurrect the idea of a
group option that strips embedded images from messages and does
something with them besides letting them just proliferate in the
Emailed Photos folder.
As you may know, images can be embedded in HTML formatted messages using a few different schemes, only one of which ("cid") would be subjected to the existing group Attachments control, and apparently that is also the only scheme that gets listed in the Emailed Photos folder.
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/11066

I would support changes to handle images in a more uniform way, and perhaps with a separate control similar to the Attachments control, but operating only on embedded images.

I just spent the last two hours deleting a bunch of dupe images linked
to messages saying things like "me too."
My suggestion for dealing with sig images would likely help with quoted images too.
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/15545

Shal


Bruce Bowman
 

On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 01:50 AM, Shal Farley wrote:
As you may know, images can be embedded in HTML formatted messages using a few different schemes, only one of which ("cid") would be subjected to the existing group Attachments control, and apparently that is also the only scheme that gets listed in the Emailed Photos folder.
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/11066
The "cid" version is the only one that I consider objectionable, inasmuch as these are the ones that proliferate.

An image embedded via a hyperlink (e.g: an <img> tag) is not objectionable to me, as it takes up no space in the group, or even on groups.io's server. It can become a problem later if the referenced, off-site image is subsequently deleted, but that's the OP's problem.

As for the "data" one, they aren't too objectionable, inasmuch as they are rarely used. But assuming such images do get forwarded in a reply, it would probably be best if they were handled in the same way as "cid".

I would support changes to handle images in a more uniform way, and perhaps with a separate control similar to the Attachments control, but operating only on embedded images.
I will take that as a bump. :-)

My suggestion for dealing with sig images would likely help with quoted images too.
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/15545
It would, but sounds so complicated as to never get implemented. As a first approximation, I'd just like a group option to strip "cid" (and perhaps "data") images and send them to the bit-bucket. This will take care of the sig line thing (not to mention that little 150-byte PNG reply separator in W10 Mail) automatically, and when group members learn that their embedded images aren't getting through [perhaps] they will begin sending them as attachments instead.*

Bruce

*I acknowledge that I could be giving your average subscriber too much credit.


Drew
 

Here's a suggestion...

1. All emailed images would be retained permanently as downsized thumbnails, viewable beneath their associated posts in the archive MESSAGES and TOPICS listings, as per following suggestion

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/16208

2. The original full-size images in the Emailed Photos folder would be retained there for a limited period, say 30 days, then automatically deleted. The OP or owner/moderators would have a chance to move them to a permanent folder during that time.

Admittedly, there is probably no need to permanently retain thumbnail images of silly signature gifs, etc., but they will not take up much space and will provide an archive of sorts of every image that subscribers have posted to the group.


Drew

On 09/23/18 10:25, Bruce Bowman wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 01:50 AM, Shal Farley wrote:


As you may know, images can be embedded in HTML formatted messages using a
few different schemes, only one of which ("cid") would be subjected to the
existing group Attachments control, and apparently that is also the only
scheme that gets listed in the Emailed Photos folder.
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/11066
The "cid" version is the only one that I consider objectionable, inasmuch as these are the ones that proliferate.
An image embedded via a hyperlink (e.g: an <img> tag) is not objectionable to me, as it takes up no space in the group, or even on groups.io's server. It can become a problem later if the referenced, off-site image is subsequently deleted, but that's the OP's problem.
As for the "data" one, they aren't too objectionable, inasmuch as they are rarely used. But assuming such images do get forwarded in a reply, it would probably be best if they were handled in the same way as "cid".


I would support changes to handle images in a more uniform way, and
perhaps with a separate control similar to the Attachments control, but
operating only on embedded images.
I will take that as a bump. :-)


My suggestion for dealing with sig images would likely help with quoted
images too.
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/15545
It would, but sounds so complicated as to never get implemented. As a first approximation, I'd just like a group option to strip "cid" (and perhaps "data") images and send them to the bit-bucket. This will take care of the sig line thing (not to mention that little 150-byte PNG reply separator in W10 Mail) automatically, and when group members learn that their embedded images aren't getting through [perhaps] they will begin sending them as attachments instead.*
Bruce
*I acknowledge that I could be giving your average subscriber too much credit.


Michael Pavan
 

Here's a suggestion...

1. All emailed images would be retained permanently as downsized thumbnails, viewable beneath their associated posts in the archive MESSAGES and TOPICS listings, as per following suggestion

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/16208

2. The original full-size images in the Emailed Photos folder would be retained there for a limited period, say 30 days, then automatically deleted. The OP or owner/moderators would have a chance to move them to a permanent folder during that time.

Admittedly, there is probably no need to permanently retain thumbnail images of silly signature gifs, etc., but they will not take up much space and will provide an archive of sorts of every image that subscribers have posted to the group.
Sounds good.


YahooGroups automatically removed attachments from messages and put them in an “Attachments” folder in the “Files” section. This made it easy for members to find an attachment by looking in that folder, rather than having to find the message, which frequently did not a Subject Line that was the same as the Attachment’s name and therefore makes finding the correct message more difficult.

Additionally a Group Owner or empowered Moderator, could easily (find and) delete attachments or move them to an appropriate folder in “Files”. I would quite appreciate it if Groups.io would add a feature that would allowing deleting or moving attachments.


Bruce Bowman
 

Drew -- How does this address duplication of images in the Emailed Photos folder?

Your thumbnail suggestion has applicability not only to embedded images but to attached ones as well. While I agree it would be nice to have that, if we could keep the two issues separate and not confuse your previous feature request with a problem that only arises with embedded images I'd really appreciate that.

Thanks,
Bruce


On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 12:36 PM, Drew wrote:
Here's a suggestion...

1. All emailed images would be retained permanently as downsized
thumbnails, viewable beneath their associated posts in the archive
MESSAGES and TOPICS listings, as per following suggestion

https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/16208

2. The original full-size images in the Emailed Photos folder would be
retained there for a limited period, say 30 days, then automatically
deleted. The OP or owner/moderators would have a chance to move them to
a permanent folder during that time.

Admittedly, there is probably no need to permanently retain thumbnail
images of silly signature gifs, etc., but they will not take up much
space and will provide an archive of sorts of every image that
subscribers have posted to the group.


Drew





On 09/23/18 10:25, Bruce Bowman wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 01:50 AM, Shal Farley wrote:


As you may know, images can be embedded in HTML formatted messages using a
few different schemes, only one of which ("cid") would be subjected to the
existing group Attachments control, and apparently that is also the only
scheme that gets listed in the Emailed Photos folder.
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/11066
The "cid" version is the only one that I consider objectionable, inasmuch as these are the ones that proliferate.

An image embedded via a hyperlink (e.g: an <img> tag) is not objectionable to me, as it takes up no space in the group, or even on groups.io's server. It can become a problem later if the referenced, off-site image is subsequently deleted, but that's the OP's problem.

As for the "data" one, they aren't too objectionable, inasmuch as they are rarely used. But assuming such images do get forwarded in a reply, it would probably be best if they were handled in the same way as "cid".


I would support changes to handle images in a more uniform way, and
perhaps with a separate control similar to the Attachments control, but
operating only on embedded images.
I will take that as a bump. :-)


My suggestion for dealing with sig images would likely help with quoted
images too.
https://beta.groups.io/g/main/message/15545
It would, but sounds so complicated as to never get implemented. As a first approximation, I'd just like a group option to strip "cid" (and perhaps "data") images and send them to the bit-bucket. This will take care of the sig line thing (not to mention that little 150-byte PNG reply separator in W10 Mail) automatically, and when group members learn that their embedded images aren't getting through [perhaps] they will begin sending them as attachments instead.*

Bruce

*I acknowledge that I could be giving your average subscriber too much credit.




 

Bruce,

As a first approximation, I'd just like a group option to strip "cid"
(and perhaps "data") images and send them to the bit-bucket. ... and
when group members learn that their embedded images aren't getting
through [perhaps] they will begin sending them as attachments
instead.
Ah, I was wondering if you'd allow attachments, or require them to use the Photos section instead.

To me, stripping all embedded images just to cope with the proliferation problem feels like tossing the baby with the bathwater. In many of my groups there's a large value in being able to include illustrations or snap-shots in the running text of the messages. My goal would be to make that work as smoothly as possible in most cases.

And Groups.io has largely achieved that. Were it not for group storage limits I wouldn't even have much heartache over the duplicated images resulting from replies, or the superfluous images in some members' sigs. Yes, they make a mess of the Emailed Photos album, but that's a feature I'm willing to ignore so long as messages can retain their image components.

Shal


 

Drew,

1. All emailed images would be retained permanently as downsized
thumbnails, viewable beneath their associated posts in the archive
MESSAGES and TOPICS listings, ...
I like that suggestion, it relates here in the sense of providing a reminder of images lost, given the implementation of (2).

2. The original full-size images in the Emailed Photos folder would be
retained there for a limited period, say 30 days, then automatically
deleted. The OP or owner/moderators would have a chance to move them
to a permanent folder during that time.
I like the idea of allowing the group managers to move selected images to a permanent album (assuming the <img> linkage in the message body gets fixed-up accordingly).

But I don't see the need for a time limit on the ones that haven't been moved; they could just auto-delete as any old attachment (assuming the group's management has selected to delete old attachments when approaching the group's storage limit).

Shal


Bruce Bowman
 

On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 04:18 PM, Shal Farley wrote:
To me, stripping all embedded images just to cope with the proliferation problem feels like tossing the baby with the bathwater. In many of my groups there's a large value in being able to include illustrations or snap-shots in the running text of the messages. My goal would be to make that work as smoothly as possible in most cases.
I do understand why some people would choose not to implement this in their own group(s). However, keep in mind that much of the problem stems not at all from the original post, but all the replies from subscribers that fail to trim. 

And Groups.io has largely achieved that. Were it not for group storage limits I wouldn't even have much heartache over the duplicated images resulting from replies, or the superfluous images in some members' sigs. Yes, they make a mess of the Emailed Photos album, but that's a feature I'm willing to ignore so long as messages can retain their image components.
Different group owners have different priorities. The storage limit and cluttered Emailed Photos album are both legitimate concerns and should not be tossed off as unimportant. 

This option strikes me as fairly simple to implement, and I cannot fathom why anyone would object to having the tool in our toolbox.

Regards,
Bruce


 

Bruce,

However, keep in mind that much of the problem stems not at all from
the original post, but all the replies from subscribers that fail to
trim.
Indeed so.

The storage limit and cluttered Emailed Photos album are both
legitimate concerns and should not be tossed off as unimportant.
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).

On the other hand I'm fully on board with the storage concern.

This option strikes me as fairly simple to implement, and I cannot
fathom why anyone would object to having the tool in our toolbox.
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.

My purpose in commenting here is to explore whether there's a workable solution that resolves the /duplication/ problem, without also trimming away the originals.

Short of the kind of automation I suggested (that indeed may be too complicated to be implemented, at least in the short run), I like Drew's suggestion (2), even though it may entail a fair amount of group manager attention to preserve the desirable images in a permanent album.

Shal


Bruce Bowman
 

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.

My purpose in commenting here is to explore whether there's a workable solution that resolves the /duplication/ problem, without also trimming away the originals.
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.

Regards,
Bruce


ro-esp
 

On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:46 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
keep in mind that much of the problem stems not at all
from the original post, but all the replies from subscribers that fail to
trim. 
Sorry to have to bring this up over and over, but this implies the problem could be solved by extending the autotrim-feature to individual emails.

groetjes, Ronaldo


Bruce Bowman
 

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 06:58 PM, ro-esp wrote:
Sorry to have to bring this up over and over, but this implies the problem could be solved by extending the autotrim-feature to individual emails.
That won't remedy the embedded sig line image problem or the W10 Mail PNG reply separator problem.

Bruce


Bruce Bowman
 

Um, I would still would like a group option to do this, for reasons already mentioned.

Just trying to divert things before a heated discussion breaks out over the Oxford comma. :-)

Bruce


 

On Sat, Sep 22, 2018 at 10:50 PM, Shal Farley wrote:

As you may know, images can be embedded in HTML formatted messages using a few different schemes, only one of which ("cid") would be subjected to the existing group Attachments control, and apparently that is also the only scheme that gets listed in the Emailed Photos folder. https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/message/11066

We should be automatically converting data: images into cid: attachments, which should then appear in Emailed Photos. If there are instances of that not happening, please send me a pointer to them at support as that's a bug.

Thanks, Mark


dave w
 

And I'd support doing something, even small steps sooner than later.
It will save a few gigs of space overall, which cant be a bad thing.
Stripping ridiculous sig files isn't that great a harm to messages. They're usualy egotistical crap anyway and as I cme from the early 90's of net, many are an 'abuse' of the privilege ( 4 lines max etc.)!
Given the anal-retentive control freaks who seem to manage- sorry 'OWN'  many groups but themselves do nothing to manage anything let alone 'control' member 'message' behaviour and format to the detriment of other members, an 'auto-flush' feature seems quite appropriate!
+1 Bruce and Shal.
Thanks davew


Kenny Paul
 

Followed the link from the GMF thread to this.

+1 on a simple strip images option setting.

Less worried about the "what to do with them afterwards" discussion.


Anita L
 

I agree with this. Hope it will be done soon.

Anita