The reduce of the inventory system was much needed for the logic and consistency of the content. I thank you again and encourage you in this path.
However, it it still possible to improve the approach and I decided that maybe I can help in this area by voicing the concern here.
With meticulous reflexion, I came out with this ideas below that can certainly be obvious.

1. It will be accurate to have a separation system for clothing pockets. A compartmentalisation in the grid of the slot system for each pocket of each garment that will automatically prevent large objects from entering a pocket (for example, a car radiator, a baseball bat or a cooking pot, etc) without underlying prejudice concerning the capacity of a targeted pocket while providing more useful and luxurious support for backpacks to hold items that can't fit into clothing pockets.
2. It will also be more accurate that the slot number of each pocket provides an accurate mirror in the capacity department without exaggeration. This also means that no pocket in the garment = no cargo. The balance of <no cargo> can be elsewhere (such as insulation, weight, comfort, protection, concealment, garment's aesthetic choice, etc). These compensations examples are focused on an authentic balance and these will be more judicious and justifiable for the nature, consistency and logic of the content.
3. The visuals of the pouches currently present in the contents are Triple Mag Pouch. It would be appropriate to separate them into three compartments with the quantity, size, volume and compactness of three magazines in mind while leaving the choice open to store different things in place of three magazines without exaggerating the capacity. (For example, if we can put/attach 3 magazines taking 6 slots space each, then the counterpart should be somewhere within this capacity without exaggerations.
4. It would make more sense to require appropriate straps and slings to attach an object to the survivor (many tools considered: weapons, building/farming tools, binoculars, traditional shoulder/back bag/quiver bow for arrow-like projectiles, etc) without some kind of magic happening and overpowering the inventory system which is already overpowered.
5. It would also be sensible and accurate to have to remove our backpack from our back to be able to view its container and interact with it (with the exception of proximity placements such as handheld transceivers, etc). This will ensure that survivors are not surprised by equipment suddenly coming out of a backpack without interacting with the backpack.
6. To take just one another issue with one example, pieces of ammunition in the inventory system always stack in the same space and weight when combined, regardless of quantity and caliber. (IRL, for example, one 7.62x51 NATO cartridge weigh approximately 25.4 grams. 100 of them would weigh 2540 grams or 2.54 kg). (508 g converted to kg = 0,508 kg). In DayZ, 7.62x51 NATO can stack up to 20 in one single slot and keep the same weight. IRL, 1 x 7.62x51 NATO = approx 25.4 grams and 20 pieces x 25.4 grams = 508 grams or 0,508 Kg and would certainly not take the same space as 1 piece. Thus, it is an element in the inventory system that is overpowering the carrying capacity of ammunition.

The issue is that, even with the appreciated improvements brought by EXP 1.26, the permissiveness of the inventory system is still forgivingly exaggerated. It is still not consistent nor logical enough with the nature of the content, as it doesn't take into account the accuracy and common sense of cargo along with the basic survival elements related to the content.
It is therefore still an inauthentic and very forgiving element that affects the genuine challenge represented by a gritty, harsh survival aspect for an authentic and unforgiving post-apocalyptic world.
I believe that this is a fundamental element that needs to be reprioritised, emphasised and given importance because it blocks the path for further authentic provisions and possibilities in terms of inconveniences in motion, movement, progress, concealment, cloth layering, fatigue, calorie expenditure, dehydration, terrain affectation, surface allocation, shortness of breath, risk of injury, etc all due to a system of weight alone. This goes without mentioning many other basic survival and common sense elements related to the inventory system, to the capacities of survivors, internal and external / direct and indirect affectations, as well as further authentic compensations and possibilities.

I request to justify, seek and embrace the congruency with/to the content which is officially described and marketed as authentic and unforgiving. To remember its simulation roots and proper due; to base the consistency and logic on this matter.

May we examine this question?

Regards,