The loser here seems to be the 10D. No compatible wide angle zoom, and I therefore wonder if that means that its replacement will be released soon and will be full frame?
An upgrade of the 10D does seem very likely, but I seriously doubt it will be "full frame"; all the signs are that the mainstream digital camera market is aggresively "D-sizing" (read as "down-sizing" or "digital-sizing"). Even FF champion Canon is investing heavily in increasing its capacity for producing what it now (inaccurately) calls "APS-C" format sensors.
So I expect a 10D upgrade with the same sensor (or only slightly larger) and the DRebel's new "flip up, slide back" mirror mechanism needed to avoid the mirror hitting the backward protruding rear elements of the new S lenses ("S" for short back focus?). Then maybe some higher grade "S" lenses will follow.
That is independent of the possible addition of something to fill the chasm between the 10D and 1Ds.
After the recent flood of "2003 holiday gift" product launches, it seems rather clear where the industry is aiming with respect to sensor formats. Every major player is now either
a) making all their amateur level cameras with D-sized sensors and making a longer term commitment by introducing D-sized short focal length lenses [Canon, Fuji, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and Sony as a sensor supplier]
or
pushing high end digicams with fast, wide ranging zoom lenses [Fuji, Kodak, Minolta, Nikon and Sony].
To me this looks like industry consensus that in the forseeable future, 35mm format DSLR is for the high end (including sufficently serious amateurs), while smaller formats will take the great majority of the "film SLR replacement" market (including some categories of professional work where the smaller formats, sometimes even 2/3" format digicams, get the job done most conveniently and economically.)
One thing to think about is the cost of optical components: smaller sensors, and more precisely smaller pixels, lead to the use of lenses of smaller focal lengths (and smaller, lighter pentaprisms as pioneered, appropriately, by Pentax). They therefore offer significantly lower costs and bulk, independent of any progress in sensor costs, and so it will always make sense for most photographers to go for the smallest pixels and sensors that get the job done well enough for their purposes, just as has always been the case with film formats.
P. S. APS-C has a clearly defined meaning: the 16.7x25.1mm format used by APS cameras for "Classic" 3/2 shape prints, which is a 1.43x crop from 35mm frame; almost perfectly "half frame area". How Canon dares to use this name in an official press release referring to their significantly smaller 15.1x22.7mm sensors is beyond me. Maybe they plan their next generation sensors to be truly "APS-C" sized and are designing their S lenses for that?