Such a numbering scheme is not part of any 'industry standard' I'm aware of. Indeed, a number like 1.0 Heading implies a Heading 2, but with its numbering starting from 0 instead of 1. If that's the visual effect you want, it's a simple matter to define a numbering scheme that gives you exactly that - and you format Heading 1 as hidden and only use it to force Heading 2 (which you use in its place) to increment.

__________________
Cheers,
Paul Edstein
[Fmr MS MVP - Word]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I'm talking about the written report when complete, not the computer programming industry. I swear, it's as if the guys who write this stuff do their best to make sure the finished product is as far opposite what we actually need (for those of us authoring the darned things) as possible. (good example, though not word, is their taking the super and sub scripts and burying them in the ribbon in Excel...gee who would possibly need quick access to those when they're writing sample analysis tables? )

At any rate, in my industry and related industries (where we produce tech memos, investigation reports etc for DoD, other federal agencies, oil companies, and such), the 1.0, 2.0 for heading 1 has always been standard. To have a heading 1., or even just 1 just looks weird, especially when it's followed by 1.1 and so on.

But that was just a gripe, I actually know how to force heading 1 to accept the zero. My real problem is the weird strike throughs that keep happening further along in my document in Heading 2 and 3.

I even selected, copied and pasted it to a new word doc, which helped a little, but about the middle of the document I started having that grayed out strike through problem again. I've noticed it seems to be after text that's been selected through tracked changes, but trying to accept or reject changes just makes it worse.

Thanks again.