++. Nice piece. I like the attempt to frame the problem and break it down. I particularly like the initial cut at a definition. However, in addition to your definition, I'd like to see how you would include the concepts of architecture and scalability.

I tend of think of "enterprise" activities as having to address issues of scale on multiple fronts, including organizational grouping, geographical locations, heterogeneous processes as well as the usual definitions of scalability from a technical sense. These considerations inevitably lead to questions of architecture to integrate disparate parts of the whole.

Perl meets all of the requirements for enterprise languages

You lay out a broad framework for enterprise software, then narrow in on a very specific set of standards for language and conclude that Perl is fitting for enterprise use. What about the rest of your framework? How is Perl fitting for software that is developed by one team and maintained by other teams? What characteristics make it suited for long-term maintainability?

I consider myself a Perl advocate.

If you want to improve as an advocate and ensure you avoid zealotry, write a convicing essay that makes the opposite points.

I think this is a great start, but it's still a little too one-sided to be convincing to those not already convinced. I'd love to see a revision based on feedback received here and after you've written the opposite piece. Then it might well be the kind of stuff TPF can use for advocacy more broadly.