>
>
> Xslt has been designed as a language with a purpose; 

It was designed as a language with a purpose.

> perl has neither of these attributes, hence perl's chaotic nature and
> unmaintainabilty. 

Same about perl and almost the same purpose. What about maintainability,
look at CPAN. Can XSLT dream about this volume of maintainable and usable code?

> But I
> think, as well, it's a matter of apples and pears. An XSLT application
> would, IMO, also include Java or some other language. Perl fills in any gap
> it can gets it's paws on, 

A perl application typically includes code written in C, Java and other
languages, if needed.

> but I'd rather use python if push came to shove.

What's the difference between Python and XSLT 2.0?

David Tolpin
http://davidashen.net/

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