You're being bitten by a particular preference setting that can be changed.
Open Preferences > File Handling > Links. The default setting is "Preserve Image Dimensons When Relinking"
That's why it's keeping the file dimensions the same.
If you uncheck that preference, it will scale when updating the link.
Different workflows have different requirements. Your workflow requires rescaling artwork when the artworks changes dimensions.
Thanks for your very helpful answer.
What is wrong with the people at Adobe? Is there also a preference to not change the color, line weight, shape, or other attribute? What is the point of being able to update a placed file if ID ignores your changes? If size is the only thing it ignores, why pick that one attribute of an image? I cannot think of a reason that an updated, placed file would not reflect ALL the changes. Clearly, this is not a "feature," It is clearly a bug that was not corrected in the code but made into something the user has to fix with a patch accessed via the preferences. That is lazy and inexcusable and typical of the toxic company Adobe has become since it became a monopoly in the graphic design business.
Thanks again for your help!
Preferences are necessary because different people require different workflows. There is definitely not only one way to do things.
Preferences are not a patch. If the default were changed to what you want, trust me, you'd have a ton of people complaining about the change.
Have a good day!
You make a good point, but I can't fathom why the default is to NOT change the size. The default should be the opposite since I'm pretty sure most people would prefer that all changes to placed files be reflected in the ID layout. Even more important, however, is that people would expect all the changes to be reflected. People would understand this as a rational default and you would not get complaints. When designing GUIs (or anything: radios, car dashboards, washing machines), you should always have defaults be what is intuitive to the user. Having everything change is what most users would expect to happen and that is how it should be designed. What users ultimately want is different from what they intuitively think. Hard to explain, but this is what designers (such as myself) go to school for. You have a good day, too!
What I would expect is that people using high end software would spend time learning it and when asking questions about it, be thankful that something they thought couldn’t be done would be easy to do with a simple click of a mouse.
Not much about InDesign, nor any high end application, is intuitive. I’ve been using InDesign since 1999 and I’m still learning. I suggest you take a deep breath and do the same.
I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that software costing thousands of dollars have at least the same amount of attention to design as a $100 radio or $300 television. Why does software get a pass? It's made to be used by people so it should be designed as such. Where is the logic in that if something is poorly implemented long enough it suddenly becomes OK? I've been using graphic design and CAD software since 1988 and I've seen the design interfaces peak around 2000 and have been steadily eroding since. To say it has always been bad is simply not true. They used to be good. It's just that people now accept poor products as normal when they should demand more.
They weren’t better…they were simpler.
The feature sets of software 16 years ago pales in comparison to what’s available today. With all of those features come choices.
You can only have one default. As already pointed out…if you don’t like it, change it.
As someone who prefers the size to remain the same, let me explain why. If you've gone to all the trouble to do your layout, and at the last minute someone orders an image change (and not necessarily an edit of the same image), it's a great time saver that the replacement is going to occupy the same space.