the tag doesn't visually stand out against a page full of template HTML

I write my html in lowercase and my TMPL code in upper case. Stands out a mile, e.g.

    <h3><TMPL_VAR HEADER></h3>
    <h4>please log in:</h4>
    <form action="input.pl" method="POST" name="mainform">
    <input type=hidden name="Action" value="
<TMPL_VAR FUNCTION>">
    user name: <input type=text width=30 name="UserName" value="<TMPL_
+VAR USER_NAME>"><BR>
    pass word: <input type=password width=30 name="PassWord" value="<T
+MPL_VAR PASS_WORD>"><br>
<TMPL_IF LOG_IN>
    <h4>if you don't have a user name, then you'll need to <a href="in
+put.pl?Action=StartRegister">register</a><br>and if you've forgotten 
+your user name or pass word, <a href="mailto:<TMPL_VAR EMAIL>">email 
+me</a></h4>
</TMPL_IF>
<TMPL_IF REGISTER>
    security code: <input type=text width=30 name="SecCode" value="<TM
+PL_VAR SEC_CODE>"><BR>
    if you don't know the security code, chances are you didn't get an
+ email from me inviting you to be here... if you'd like one, please <
+a href="mailto:
<TMPL_VAR EMAIL>">email me</a>
</TMPL_IF>
[download]

Having said that, I have some sympathy with your aesthetic reservations about >>! But seriously, I'd like to add my voice to those that say HTML::Template pretty much fits the spec you laid out. Certainly as I've found more and more imaginative ways of configuring the param() method, I've found there's no structure I want to use that it can't handle with ease. And the bonus is, it lets me do the complicated stuff in regular perl, not some strange module dialect.

§ George Sherston