>Yes. I believe data objects to be preferable on a web app. What Rick said made sense. And I talked to Kevin McNeish about it also when he was in LA to teach a class for a day last month.<

Yeah, well, different preferences for different people. <s>

I'm not the only one who prefers Typed DataSets. <g> Two different schools of thought, that's all. Neither methodology is right or wrong.

~~Bonnie



>
>
>>Perry,
>>
>>>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.<
>>
>>I don't think there were many problems with Typed DataSets in 1.1 ... I've been using them from the get-go and thought they were the greatest things since sliced bread!! <g>
>>
>>>>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.<
>>
>>Maybe ... I think it probably depends on how big your DataSet is ... a lot of tables and a lot of columns in each table might make a difference in a web app, but if you only have a few tables I bet it's no big deal.
>>
>>>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 assume you mean this is a problem only if you want to use a Typed DataSet in a WinForm app but you don't want to use that Typed DataSet in your web app?
>>
>>~~Bonnie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>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?