>>What do you think about Remote Scripting? It works (They say <g>) in IE and NS versions 3 and forward.
>
>Hi Mark,
>
>I've played around with remote scripting quite a bit. I does work with IE/NS 3.0 and above. I found that response is sluggish so field level validation via RS is not practical. Form level validation prior to post would be ok or for updating dynamic content of a form. I do have a basic HTML framework to establish the RS connection and expose the ASP class methods during the document load so responce time is improved. If your interested in the code drop me an e-mail and I'll send you a copy.
>
>You can accomplish the same thing using standard form posts to server. Set your main form inside a frameset. The frameset will contain your main page and a hidden frame to handle server requests. You then use client side javascripts to handle sending requests to the server and processing the returned data into the main page.
>
>IMO - XML is better but not quite ready for prime time. Remote Scripting is an option but I would use the frameset approach. The only real advantage RS gives you is the ability to wrap all of your server side functions into a class and expose the methods to the client. The drawbacks include slower response, slower form loads, all RS data returned in a single string that you must parse, standard RS class uses "get" which limits returned data to ~1192 bytes (though you can modify the class to use post), works only with ASP - I thought you were using ISAPI.

Boy, Michael, you are good. This idea with a hidden frame is what I need. But how exactly will I process data returned from server? Foxisapi returns HTML. Will I have to parse within JS on the hidden page? Please explain.
So you are saying that doing things like this is more efficient than RS? And Yes, I am interested in RS framework code.
Thanks a lot, Mark