Let $\mathcal A$ be an abelian category. Let $A$ be an object in $\mathcal A$ and let $(A_i)_{i\in I}$ be a set of subobjects of $A$. Then there is a subobject $\sum_{i \in I} A_i$ of $A$ which has all the $A_i$'s as a subobject, namely the image of the canonical morphism $\gamma \colon \coprod_{i \in I} A_i \to A$. Please refer to this question for more on this. However I am having trouble showing that this is the smallest such subobject.
What does "smallest subobject" mean in this sense? Does it mean given any subobject $X \longrightarrow A$ such that every $A_i$ is a subobject of $X$ then $ \operatorname{im} \gamma \longrightarrow A \le X \longrightarrow A $ OR does it mean that given any subobject $X \longrightarrow A$ such that every $A_i$ is a subobject of $X$ and also we have a commutative diagram of subobject arrows $ \begin{array}{ccc} A_i & \rightarrow & A \\ & \searrow & \uparrow \\ & & X \end{array} $ then $ \operatorname{im} \gamma \longrightarrow A \le X \longrightarrow A ? $
In the latter case I can see it because we can just use the universal property of the coproduct and the image to draw an arrow $\operatorname{im}\gamma \to X$ which works. However I cannot see this for the former case. If "smallest subobject" means the latter case why is it not completely specified in the language; is it a convention?