🚀 go-pugleaf

> Perhaps we need a group, comp.ui for user interfaces.  Or will the windows
> groups handle it?

I vehemently support a comp.ui group.
Posting to several possibly relevant windows groups, as continues to happen,
simply wastes net.money and prompts indignant reminders from aficionadoes
of the "real" topic.

General features of windowing systems seem to belong only in comp.windows.misc

But there's a lot more to user interfaces than windows...

Alternative input and output devices
- tactile feedback
- audio
- touchscreens
- multimodal (say, mouse and trackball...)

Animation 
- ARK (Alternate Reality Kit)-style interfaces and other visual metaphors
- programming by example
.
.
.
Some of these topics might adequately be covered in other groups,
but clearly there is a sort of gestalt to this topic that doesn't
necessarily exist within even a broad cross-section of other groups.

The issue is, how should humans interact with their technology?

Not whether we need (insert generic window feature here) on the 
(insert generic machine or window package here).

Just an opinion,
Craig