While your exposition is good and raises good points, the conclusion is wrong. Mini-Languages have their place, as domain-specific tools for expressing domain specific rules. Two examples:
- make - like its greater sibling, Prolog, make employs its own minilanguage for specifying rules and actions which will be verified respectively executed in a fashion to reach a goal. The make syntax has no nice counterpart in Perl.
- SQL - SQL is a very restricted language with one goal - to unify queries against database servers. While DBI does not have its own proprietary minilanguage, it employs SQL as a widerspread minilanguage.
Your ad-hominem attacks on the authors of CGI::Application and CGI::Prototype don't help either.
Update: Struck out the part of the reply that criticized the (now removed) attack.