> I recognise my need (in 3 places) for saxon:line-number() and 
> would support its addition to the base language as a case in point.

ah, so that's the criterion, only extensions that you've used should be
let in:-)

>  Its the idea of any non xsl vocab inside my stylesheet that I
> object to.

I don't really think there is much special about the distinction of
being in the same file. If it's some script inside an msxml:script
element or an extension function accessed via a java: URI pointing at
some class that is hopefully on my java classpath, the effect is the
same: it will either work or it won't depending on circumstances.
So I don't see stylesheets using msxml:script as any less portable than
an xsl 1.0 stylesheet using the XSL engine's current java binding to
an extension function.


David

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered
through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp

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