pre-rendered vs client-side processed javascript

[PJ6]

CSS pseudoclasses are too limiting at the moment (epspecially for IE), so
when I'm authoring say, a grid control, I believe there are only two
possibilities - one, emit javascirpt for each cell, or two, emit javascript
to wire up events to each cell client side. I've read a lot about the
benefits of using the second approach because it "saves bandwidth"... but
really. That's trivial unless you have a large number of rows, in which case
you have a poor presentation design. Which approach is best for performance
client side? I would be inclined to say the first but before I go ahead and
test: this question has probably already been asked and answered; what's the
commonly accepted best practice?

Paul

[Steve C. Orr [MCSD, MVP, CSM, ASP Insider]]

The commonly accepted best practice is the second approach.
Even if you don't have very many rows, if you multiply that by however many
page requests that page will receive then it adds up.
It also keeps the page output tidier by having the JavaScript in one place
instead of scattered all over.
As far as client side performance then I don't think there's any significant
difference between the two approaches unless you consider the slower page
load time of option #1.

--
I hope this helps,
Steve C. Orr,
MCSD, MVP, CSM, ASPInsider
http://SteveOrr.net
"PJ6" <no***@nowhere. netwrote in message
news:uW******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

CSS pseudoclasses are too limiting at the moment (epspecially for IE), so
when I'm authoring say, a grid control, I believe there are only two
possibilities - one, emit javascirpt for each cell, or two, emit
javascript to wire up events to each cell client side. I've read a lot
about the benefits of using the second approach because it "saves
bandwidth"... but really. That's trivial unless you have a large number of
rows, in which case you have a poor presentation design. Which approach is
best for performance client side? I would be inclined to say the first but
before I go ahead and test: this question has probably already been asked
and answered; what's the commonly accepted best practice?

Paul

[PJ6]

Well than that is how I will do it.

Thanks,
Paul

"Steve C. Orr [MCSD, MVP, CSM, ASP Insider]" <St***@Orr.netw rote in
message news:0F******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...

The commonly accepted best practice is the second approach.
Even if you don't have very many rows, if you multiply that by however
many page requests that page will receive then it adds up.
It also keeps the page output tidier by having the JavaScript in one place
instead of scattered all over.
As far as client side performance then I don't think there's any
significant difference between the two approaches unless you consider the
slower page load time of option #1.

--
I hope this helps,
Steve C. Orr,
MCSD, MVP, CSM, ASPInsider
http://SteveOrr.net
"PJ6" <no***@nowhere. netwrote in message
news:uW******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

>CSS pseudoclasses are too limiting at the moment (epspecially for IE), so
when I'm authoring say, a grid control, I believe there are only two
possibilitie s - one, emit javascirpt for each cell, or two, emit
javascript to wire up events to each cell client side. I've read a lot
about the benefits of using the second approach because it "saves
bandwidth".. . but really. That's trivial unless you have a large number
of rows, in which case you have a poor presentation design. Which
approach is best for performance client side? I would be inclined to say
the first but before I go ahead and test: this question has probably
already been asked and answered; what's the commonly accepted best
practice?

Paul

[PJ6]

Well now that I'm doing it that way, rather than inheriting from Table and
populating it server-side, I'm inclined to pass raw data to a javascript
function and build the table client-side instead. Is that acceptable design
practice?

Paul

"Steve C. Orr [MCSD, MVP, CSM, ASP Insider]" <St***@Orr.netw rote in
message news:0F******** *************** ***********@mic rosoft.com...

The commonly accepted best practice is the second approach.
Even if you don't have very many rows, if you multiply that by however
many page requests that page will receive then it adds up.
It also keeps the page output tidier by having the JavaScript in one place
instead of scattered all over.
As far as client side performance then I don't think there's any
significant difference between the two approaches unless you consider the
slower page load time of option #1.

--
I hope this helps,
Steve C. Orr,
MCSD, MVP, CSM, ASPInsider
http://SteveOrr.net
"PJ6" <no***@nowhere. netwrote in message
news:uW******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP05.phx.gbl...

>CSS pseudoclasses are too limiting at the moment (epspecially for IE), so
when I'm authoring say, a grid control, I believe there are only two
possibilitie s - one, emit javascirpt for each cell, or two, emit
javascript to wire up events to each cell client side. I've read a lot
about the benefits of using the second approach because it "saves
bandwidth".. . but really. That's trivial unless you have a large number
of rows, in which case you have a poor presentation design. Which
approach is best for performance client side? I would be inclined to say
the first but before I go ahead and test: this question has probably
already been asked and answered; what's the commonly accepted best
practice?

Paul