Quote - Would that not make it easier to morph? True single mesh. No groups to cross over.

Yes and no.  In part, I'm wondering how the implementation will impact existing figures, for the purpose of conversion, say.  But say you want to write a Python script which deals with morphs.  You could end up having to iterate over all of the vertices in the mesh, when merely trying to handle the deltas which affect the face.  You'd also have to pull the entire mesh into your morphing utility in order to do any shaping.  For the case of morphs crossing over group lines (assuming there were groups), it would be better.

But what I was imagining wasn't mesh groups as separate actors, split and re-welded, as we have now.  I was thinking that, for the purposes of morphs, groups might still be defined on the un-split geometry to define the actors just for the morphs.  Currently the welding issue is the real problem.  But what I was imagining there doesn't really make much sense to me, when I try to think about it now.  So, again: hmm.

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking.  He apologizes for this.  He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below.  His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.