> I don't think I want to go much further down this path (might give
> people some annoying ideas) but does this attitude mean that there can
> never be an XSL 2.0?

I am sure there will be a version 2 or 1.1 or whatever it is called, but
it will  use the same namespace as version 1, but a different
value for the (mandatory) version attribute.

<xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
                version="2.0"
                >

The spec has a section about how XSL 1.0 processors are supposed to
handle such a file. Ie a file that unambiguously is XSL but of a later
version than the application handles.


David


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list