Looks like you really really really want to submit this module and we are not going to be able to talk you out of it. Heh, you have pretty much proven why the other modules out there don't do what this one does ... so i say go for it!

I wrote DBIx::XHTML_Table because even though i could do the same with CGI and DBI, i wanted one module. HTML::Table works, but i really don't like that module. I really don't like that module. After i wrote and submitted my module, somebody submitted the much nicer named DBIx::HTMLTable - i was a bit irate. But the point is that my module may not 'click' with a particular user the way DBIx::HTMLTable does, so i don't mind the competition. TIMTOWTDI!!

I think what folks are trying to tell you is that the CPAN namespace is getting a bit, untidy. But what i say is variety is good. A user of CPAN has the responsibility to research which module fits their needs, and if DBIx::Simple happens to help only a handful of people then i think it worthy of being a CPAN module.

P.S. next time you find yourself waiting for searches at search.cpan.org - try Perl Monk's Official Runner Up: kobe!

jeffa

L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
H---H---H---H---H---H---
(the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)

UPDATE: hehe, i like to get to the meat of the matter ;)

Yes, i think DBIx::Simple is an a-ok name.