I've been reading a book that makes a strong argument for using typed datasets in 2.0. Since they've fixed a lot of problems with the implementation in 1.0.

But Rick Strahl's comments when discussing the issue here with Bonnie made sense. When you use typed datasets VS generates a ton of code for you, good thing.

However, it's still a ton of code that must run. Not too big a problem on a desktop app. But a real big problem on a web app. And one of the big selling points of dotnet is you should be able to create an app that can easily have the UI replaced. You should be able to go from desktop to Web to Web services easily. I think you need to use Object Data Binding to make this work correctly.

>I keep leaving things out, sorry. This is a Web Form being developed with ASP.NET 2.0, not a Windows Form.
>
>That Rockford Lhotka is everywhere, isn't he?
>
>
>>No they don't but you also can use an object (any object) as a data source in VS 2005, so basically you create a class with the data structure you want and use it as a data source.
>>
>>You can check an example of how to do it here:
>>
>>http://www.15seconds.com/issue/040614.htm
>>
>>HTH,
>>Enmanuel
>>
>>
>>>>>I would like to create a work table to be used by an ASP.NET app. I want it to act like a table but not be in the database -- IOW, the equivalent of a FoxPro cursor. It will contain data from several tables as well as calculated fields. Can I do this, or do I need to add a table to the database. This is a simulation app -- lots of data is displayed for the user to consider, but I only want/need to save parts of it.
>>>>
>>>>You can use a disconnected dataset
>>>>
>>>>http://www.awprofessional.com/articles/article.asp?p=27151&seqNum=3
>>>>
>>>
>>>I forgot to mention this is VS 2005. Haven't DataSets been phased out?