By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
429,426 Members | 1,729 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 429,426 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Do you need JavaScript in ASP.NET?

P: n/a
I purchased a book titled "Pro ASP.NET 2.0" to get up to speed on web
stuff because I ususally do Windows Form Applications.. But in the
first chapters I was reading this week it brought to mind some things I
heard in the past that I thought someone could clarify.

On Page 6 it states
"ASP.NET web pages (and web services) are executed within the CLR
(common language runtime), so they can be authored in any language that
has a CLR-compliant compiler. No longer are you limited to using
VBScript or JavaScript, instead you can use modern object-oriented
languages such as Visual Basic and C#. It's also important to note that
ASP.NET pages are not interpreted but are instead compiled into
assemblies."

A friend of mine said "You still use JavaScript for client side data
validation and whatever other features you want on the client side. You
can still embed code on the HTML asp side, it's just not efficient or
very objected oriented to do so.

I just wanted to know if this is true.

Thanks

Sep 24 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
22 Replies


P: n/a
<th***********@yahoo.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@e3g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
A friend of mine said "You still use JavaScript for client side data
validation and whatever other features you want on the client side.
That's right. It's fundamental to understand that ASP.NET creates markup for
browsers to parse, interpret and render. The browsers themselves really have
no need to know what application is serving this markup to them... Of
course, ASP.NET can do much more than that server-side, because there it has
full access to the .NET Framework, which is how it interfaces with
databases, Active Directory, the server's file system, email etc.

But, essentially, it has no more interaction with your browser than through
standard HTTP requests and responses. If, say, you want to send down a page
with a button which will say "Hello world" when the user clicks it, ASP.NET
can do that for you. But once that markup has been streamed down to the
browser, ASP.NET has no knowledge of what happens next until / unless it
receives another HTTP request from the browser. If the user clicks the
button, the browser will display an alert saying "Hello world" because
ASP.NET has sent down the HTML and JavaScript necessary to make this happen.
But ASP.NET itself has no knowledge whatsoever of this event having
happened, because it has happened client-side.
You can still embed code on the HTML asp side, it's just not efficient or
very objected oriented to do so.
I think what your friend means is that your ASPX pages can contain what we
call "in-line" server-side code, just as classic ASP pages did. This does
not necessarily make things inefficient or not objected orientated, because
the server-side code even though it's embedded in the ASPX page gets
compiled by the server and is not actually streamed down to the client.
Sep 24 '06 #2

P: n/a
A friend of mine said "You still use JavaScript for client side data
validation and whatever other features you want on the client side. You
can still embed code on the HTML asp side, it's just not efficient or
very objected oriented to do so.
Yes you can embed Javascript/VBscript for client side programming.
Just remember that all ASP.NET does is "generate" some HTML and
Javascript that it sends back to the browser. You can embed your own
Javascript with the usual <Scripttags as necessary. Or you might want
to write your javascript dynamically from the code behind, ie:
Response.Write("<Script...");

And you can also include your own javascript libraries as per the usual
ways.
And yes you can include your code inline with the HTML instead of in
code behind files. I once heard that this is actually how MS implements
its pages, instead of using code behind DLL. I am not sure if it is
true or not, but the supposed reason for it was security, in that if
you got your hands on the DLL, you can decompile the entire site.
Personally I still like to enter some code inline this way, and I'm not
sure why your friend thinks its not Object Oriented to do so.

SN

Sep 24 '06 #3

P: n/a
Thanks guys, I appreciate he good responses..

John
Steven Nagy wrote:
A friend of mine said "You still use JavaScript for client side data
validation and whatever other features you want on the client side. You
can still embed code on the HTML asp side, it's just not efficient or
very objected oriented to do so.

Yes you can embed Javascript/VBscript for client side programming.
Just remember that all ASP.NET does is "generate" some HTML and
Javascript that it sends back to the browser. You can embed your own
Javascript with the usual <Scripttags as necessary. Or you might want
to write your javascript dynamically from the code behind, ie:
Response.Write("<Script...");

And you can also include your own javascript libraries as per the usual
ways.
And yes you can include your code inline with the HTML instead of in
code behind files. I once heard that this is actually how MS implements
its pages, instead of using code behind DLL. I am not sure if it is
true or not, but the supposed reason for it was security, in that if
you got your hands on the DLL, you can decompile the entire site.
Personally I still like to enter some code inline this way, and I'm not
sure why your friend thinks its not Object Oriented to do so.

SN
Sep 25 '06 #4

P: n/a
You don't normally need no JavaScript (JScript), all is generated by the
assembly that you build (dll). However as soon as you want to do some
special things as by instance using the default mailclient, than you need
(some) JavaScript.

I hope this helps,

Cor

<th***********@yahoo.comschreef in bericht
news:11**********************@e3g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
>I purchased a book titled "Pro ASP.NET 2.0" to get up to speed on web
stuff because I ususally do Windows Form Applications.. But in the
first chapters I was reading this week it brought to mind some things I
heard in the past that I thought someone could clarify.

On Page 6 it states
"ASP.NET web pages (and web services) are executed within the CLR
(common language runtime), so they can be authored in any language that
has a CLR-compliant compiler. No longer are you limited to using
VBScript or JavaScript, instead you can use modern object-oriented
languages such as Visual Basic and C#. It's also important to note that
ASP.NET pages are not interpreted but are instead compiled into
assemblies."

A friend of mine said "You still use JavaScript for client side data
validation and whatever other features you want on the client side. You
can still embed code on the HTML asp side, it's just not efficient or
very objected oriented to do so.

I just wanted to know if this is true.

Thanks

Sep 25 '06 #5

P: n/a
typo

You normally don't need JavaScript (JScript).
"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <no************@planet.nlschreef in bericht
news:%2******************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
You don't normally need no JavaScript (JScript), all is generated by the
assembly that you build (dll). However as soon as you want to do some
special things as by instance using the default mailclient, than you need
(some) JavaScript.

I hope this helps,

Cor

<th***********@yahoo.comschreef in bericht
news:11**********************@e3g2000cwe.googlegro ups.com...
>>I purchased a book titled "Pro ASP.NET 2.0" to get up to speed on web
stuff because I ususally do Windows Form Applications.. But in the
first chapters I was reading this week it brought to mind some things I
heard in the past that I thought someone could clarify.

On Page 6 it states
"ASP.NET web pages (and web services) are executed within the CLR
(common language runtime), so they can be authored in any language that
has a CLR-compliant compiler. No longer are you limited to using
VBScript or JavaScript, instead you can use modern object-oriented
languages such as Visual Basic and C#. It's also important to note that
ASP.NET pages are not interpreted but are instead compiled into
assemblies."

A friend of mine said "You still use JavaScript for client side data
validation and whatever other features you want on the client side. You
can still embed code on the HTML asp side, it's just not efficient or
very objected oriented to do so.

I just wanted to know if this is true.

Thanks


Sep 25 '06 #6

P: n/a
You normally don't need JavaScript (JScript).
I couldn't disagree more.

..NET does not account for all client side work I would ever want to do.

For example, I am creating a chess website and I want to validate that
the client has made an acceptable move with his/her knight. Naturally I
will validate this server side as well for security, but I don't want
to waste the player's time with a post back or AJAX update. So I use
Javascript to validate that the move is legal.

I am not sure how you can replicate this in .NET without some sort of
call back to the server.

But that's just my opinion of course.

Sep 25 '06 #7

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>You normally don't need JavaScript (JScript).

I couldn't disagree more.
Likewise!
.NET does not account for all client side work I would ever want to do.

For example, I am creating a chess website and I want to validate that
the client has made an acceptable move with his/her knight. Naturally I
will validate this server side as well for security, but I don't want
to waste the player's time with a post back or AJAX update. So I use
Javascript to validate that the move is legal.
Yes indeed! I do as much data validation as I can client-side in order to
minimise the round-trips to the server and back, and only do server-side
validation when e.g. I need to check a value against a database etc...
I am not sure how you can replicate this in .NET without some sort of
call back to the server.
I couldn't agree more.
Sep 25 '06 #8

P: n/a
Steven,

If you had answered my original reply instead of the correction of the
sentence (typo) "You don't normally need *no* JavaScript" than you would
have seen, that I am telling exactly the same as you.

The way it would be used is however depending on the application and a lot
of other circumstances that are used. What I however hate, is the mixing up
of JavaScript into an HTML ASPX page. JavaScript should be provided to the
program from the code behind with the proper commands for that.

(There is one thing I cannot do with that and that is setting the focus
after that a page is completely loaded, and therefore I place that in the
ASPX HTML page at the end).

Cor

"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comschreef in bericht
news:11**********************@i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
>
>You normally don't need JavaScript (JScript).

I couldn't disagree more.

.NET does not account for all client side work I would ever want to do.

For example, I am creating a chess website and I want to validate that
the client has made an acceptable move with his/her knight. Naturally I
will validate this server side as well for security, but I don't want
to waste the player's time with a post back or AJAX update. So I use
Javascript to validate that the move is legal.

I am not sure how you can replicate this in .NET without some sort of
call back to the server.

But that's just my opinion of course.

Sep 26 '06 #9

P: n/a
If you had answered my original reply instead of the correction of the
sentence (typo) "You don't normally need *no* JavaScript" than you would
have seen, that I am telling exactly the same as you.
I don't really understand what you are on about.
You first said:
"You don't normally need no Javascript"
Then you corrected yourself, saying:
"You don't normally need Javascript"

So I assumed the second statement was the one that you really ment, ie.
The one that says "You don't normally need Javascript".
And thats the one I replied to.

You're confusing me. Stop it.

Sep 26 '06 #10

P: n/a
Steve,

This is what I wrote,
>You don't normally need no JavaScript (JScript), all is generated by the
assembly that you build (dll). However as soon as you want to do some
special things as by instance using the default mailclient, than you need
(some) JavaScript.
In that is a typo (typing error) where I wrote a double negative word.
Therefore I wrote a correction (normally used as "typo" in newsgroups).

Not the words you tell that I wrote, I don't like it if people are quoting
me false or using something from a message and give a wrong expression about
what I wrote..

Cor

"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comschreef in bericht
news:11**********************@d34g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...
>
>If you had answered my original reply instead of the correction of the
sentence (typo) "You don't normally need *no* JavaScript" than you would
have seen, that I am telling exactly the same as you.

I don't really understand what you are on about.
You first said:
"You don't normally need no Javascript"
Then you corrected yourself, saying:
"You don't normally need Javascript"

So I assumed the second statement was the one that you really ment, ie.
The one that says "You don't normally need Javascript".
And thats the one I replied to.

You're confusing me. Stop it.

Sep 26 '06 #11

P: n/a
Cor,

Stop using Babelfish for your translations.
It must have a bug in it today.

Could you repost EXACTLY what you ment to say please.

Also, "typo" is not a "newsgroup" term... its what we call an
"abbreviation" and is short for "typographical error".

Don't take such offense because people misinterpret what you are
_trying_ to say.
You must concede that your english is not the best, so please don't
just aim your cannons at me and fire without first considering that
perhaps the fault might really be yours.

Many thanks,
Steven

Sep 26 '06 #12

P: n/a
Steven,

If you think that you are the one who should write this kind of messages in
this newsgroup, than please do it in correct English and not in a way as
somebody who never went to school would do it.

However, thanks for your explanation of a 'typo'. I didn't check Wikepedia
for that, I saw that you took the text from there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typo

With this I am not telling that my English cannot be better or that it is
good, however somebody who tells that something is bad, does in my idea not
have to create almost more than 2 language errors in every row.

If you are not able to read the text which I wrote (I have placed it again
bellow), than tell what you don't understand from it. If you see something
that is incorrect in English, than tell that as well. I did not use the
spellchecker but now I have tried it and it did beside the word mailclient,
which I have expressly used concatenated, not give any error.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't normally need JavaScript (JScript), all is generated by the
assembly that you build (dll). However as soon as you want to do some
special things as by instance using the default mailclient, than you need
(some) JavaScript.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cor
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comschreef in bericht
news:11*********************@m7g2000cwm.googlegrou ps.com...
Cor,

Stop using Babelfish for your translations.
It must have a bug in it today.

Could you repost EXACTLY what you ment to say please.

Also, "typo" is not a "newsgroup" term... its what we call an
"abbreviation" and is short for "typographical error".

Don't take such offense because people misinterpret what you are
_trying_ to say.
You must concede that your english is not the best, so please don't
just aim your cannons at me and fire without first considering that
perhaps the fault might really be yours.

Many thanks,
Steven

Sep 26 '06 #13

P: n/a
Hi Cor,

It seems you are a very wound-up person. I am not sure why you are
directing such hostility at me. But I want to do my best to help you.

You believe that speaking english is just about spelling, but its not.
So I will attempt to help you by correcting your grammar problems
inline below.
If you think that you are the one who should write this kind of messages in
this newsgroup, than please do it in correct English and not in a way as
somebody who never went to school would do it.
If you want to write these kinds of messages in this newsgroup, then
please do it in correct English and not in a way similar to somebody
who never went to school would.
(Btw, I have Highschool, IT degree, and Masters degree)
However, thanks for your explanation of a 'typo'. I didn't check Wikepedia
for that, I saw that you took the text from there.
(This sentence is mostly ok, but I would still have structured it
differently).
(Also, I didn't need to check wikipedia; English is my natural language
and the word "typo" is part of everyday language usage).
With this I am not telling that my English cannot be better or that it is
good, however somebody who tells that something is bad, does in my idea not
have to create almost more than 2 language errors in every row.
(I am not 100% sure what you are saying exactly here, but here is my
best guess)
I am not suggesting that my English is better than yours, or even as
good as, but if somebody who suggests faults in others probably creates
at least 2 language errors in every row.
If you are not able to read the text which I wrote (I have placed it again
bellow), than tell what you don't understand from it. If you see something
that is incorrect in English, than tell that as well. I did not use the
spellchecker but now I have tried it and it did beside the word mailclient,
which I have expressly used concatenated, not give any error.
If you do not understand the text I previously wrote (I have placed it
again below), then indicate what you don't understand from it. If you
see something that is incorrect in English, then please tell what it
is. I did not use a spellchecker but I have now tried it and it was
fine except for the word "mailclient" which I have now concatenated,
and there is now no error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't normally need JavaScript (JScript), all is generated by the
assembly that you build (dll). However as soon as you want to do some
special things as by instance using the default mailclient, than you need
(some) JavaScript.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok so this is the statement you ment to say?
If so, then it is the very first line: "You don't normally need
JavaScript" that I was disagreeing with. See my previous comments.

So Cor, I hope that we can work this out because I am not the only one
who has problems with your language. I don't want to discourage you
from contributing to the newsgroups however, because you do provide
useful answers, and frequently as well. I personally appreciate
anything constructive people have to say so I hope that you can move
past your anger and concede that I have the right to disagree with your
statement.

Good luck,
Steven

Sep 26 '06 #14

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
Ok so this is the statement you ment to say?
Where you say "ment", is that also a typo...?

The reason I ask is that you also wrote "ment" in your post timed at 05:25
(by my newsreader)...

:-)
Sep 26 '06 #15

P: n/a
I'm in Australia.
Time travels differently here.
Something to do with the hole in the ozone layer.

Sep 26 '06 #16

P: n/a
Steven,

You are an Aussie, most of those are not understandable by people at the
northern side of the world by persons who are not speaking English as their
first language, and mostly we think: Why is that language not called
Aussies?

However coming back to the OP's question where you have at least now
answered my question and tells to everybody that they *must* use JavaScript
in an ASPNET page, than I think that your code probably is mostly horrible,
not maintainable and slow performing.

I have seen projects without code behind, however completely filled up with
2 kinds of program language code in the HTML page. I understand now that you
prefer that.

Therefore the later is probably the way like you are doing it as well.

I keep on telling that there should be tried to avoid writing JavaScript in
an ASPNET project. That there can be cases to use it is something I told
already in my first reply.

Cor

"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comschreef in bericht
news:11**********************@i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
Hi Cor,

It seems you are a very wound-up person. I am not sure why you are
directing such hostility at me. But I want to do my best to help you.

You believe that speaking english is just about spelling, but its not.
So I will attempt to help you by correcting your grammar problems
inline below.
>If you think that you are the one who should write this kind of messages
in
this newsgroup, than please do it in correct English and not in a way as
somebody who never went to school would do it.

If you want to write these kinds of messages in this newsgroup, then
please do it in correct English and not in a way similar to somebody
who never went to school would.
(Btw, I have Highschool, IT degree, and Masters degree)
>However, thanks for your explanation of a 'typo'. I didn't check
Wikepedia
for that, I saw that you took the text from there.

(This sentence is mostly ok, but I would still have structured it
differently).
(Also, I didn't need to check wikipedia; English is my natural language
and the word "typo" is part of everyday language usage).
>With this I am not telling that my English cannot be better or that it is
good, however somebody who tells that something is bad, does in my idea
not
have to create almost more than 2 language errors in every row.

(I am not 100% sure what you are saying exactly here, but here is my
best guess)
I am not suggesting that my English is better than yours, or even as
good as, but if somebody who suggests faults in others probably creates
at least 2 language errors in every row.
>If you are not able to read the text which I wrote (I have placed it
again
bellow), than tell what you don't understand from it. If you see
something
that is incorrect in English, than tell that as well. I did not use the
spellchecker but now I have tried it and it did beside the word
mailclient,
which I have expressly used concatenated, not give any error.

If you do not understand the text I previously wrote (I have placed it
again below), then indicate what you don't understand from it. If you
see something that is incorrect in English, then please tell what it
is. I did not use a spellchecker but I have now tried it and it was
fine except for the word "mailclient" which I have now concatenated,
and there is now no error.
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't normally need JavaScript (JScript), all is generated by the
assembly that you build (dll). However as soon as you want to do some
special things as by instance using the default mailclient, than you need
(some) JavaScript.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok so this is the statement you ment to say?
If so, then it is the very first line: "You don't normally need
JavaScript" that I was disagreeing with. See my previous comments.

So Cor, I hope that we can work this out because I am not the only one
who has problems with your language. I don't want to discourage you
from contributing to the newsgroups however, because you do provide
useful answers, and frequently as well. I personally appreciate
anything constructive people have to say so I hope that you can move
past your anger and concede that I have the right to disagree with your
statement.

Good luck,
Steven

Sep 27 '06 #17

P: n/a
Hi Cor, and thanks for the insults regarding my coding style which you
have never seen before.

Answers inline...
You are an Aussie,
Thankyou for enlightening me.
most of those are not understandable by people at the
northern side of the world by persons who are not speaking English as their
first language, and mostly we think: Why is that language not called
Aussies?
Ok so are you suggesting that people on the southern side of the world
who don't speak English CAN understand the Australian accent? Look I
can handle it if you feel like it makes you important when you insult
me, but to insult my entire country is a bit rich don't you think?
However coming back to the OP's question where you have at least now
answered my question and tells to everybody that they *must* use JavaScript
in an ASPNET page, than I think that your code probably is mostly horrible,
not maintainable and slow performing.
When did I say that everybody MUST use Javascript? Are you sure you
aren't confusing me with someone else?
I have seen projects without code behind, however completely filled up with
2 kinds of program language code in the HTML page. I understand now that you
prefer that.
How can you understand anything about me without even understanding the
English language? And wouldn't your code behind then have 3 types of
language code (C#, generated HTML, and generated Javascript)?
Personally I think that there are situations for inserting it in both
places. Master pages immediately come to mind...
Therefore the later is probably the way like you are doing it as well.
I don't want to answer this statement without first truly understanding
what you are trying to say. I think it was this, but please confirm:
"Therefore, the latter is probably the way you like doing it as well"
I keep on telling that there should be tried to avoid writing JavaScript in
an ASPNET project. That there can be cases to use it is something I told
already in my first reply.
Hey no insult in this paragraph! Good for you!
You're really coming along on that anger management program.

Look Cor, I'm not sure why you feel like you have to put me down.
Its not a bad thing that your English is lacking, and you shouldn't be
ashamed of it.
And when I point it out to you, I definately am not intending any
insult, and I apologise if it came across that way. I just think you
need to move on from this issue and get back to helping the general
community, rather than trying to somehow show the world what a bad
person I am simply because I have a point of view. Then we would get on
just fine.

Talk soon,
Steven

Sep 27 '06 #18

P: n/a
I keep it with Juan's advice, however because you asked to answer me on
that.

Have a look at this page, the word "Like" has more meanings in English do
you know.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/like

The way you used it was not the way like it was meant or that I like.

Cor
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comschreef in bericht
news:11********************@m7g2000cwm.googlegroup s.com...
Hi Cor, and thanks for the insults regarding my coding style which you
have never seen before.

Answers inline...
>You are an Aussie,

Thankyou for enlightening me.
>most of those are not understandable by people at the
northern side of the world by persons who are not speaking English as
their
first language, and mostly we think: Why is that language not called
Aussies?

Ok so are you suggesting that people on the southern side of the world
who don't speak English CAN understand the Australian accent? Look I
can handle it if you feel like it makes you important when you insult
me, but to insult my entire country is a bit rich don't you think?
>However coming back to the OP's question where you have at least now
answered my question and tells to everybody that they *must* use
JavaScript
in an ASPNET page, than I think that your code probably is mostly
horrible,
not maintainable and slow performing.

When did I say that everybody MUST use Javascript? Are you sure you
aren't confusing me with someone else?
>I have seen projects without code behind, however completely filled up
with
2 kinds of program language code in the HTML page. I understand now that
you
prefer that.

How can you understand anything about me without even understanding the
English language? And wouldn't your code behind then have 3 types of
language code (C#, generated HTML, and generated Javascript)?
Personally I think that there are situations for inserting it in both
places. Master pages immediately come to mind...
>Therefore the later is probably the way like you are doing it as well.

I don't want to answer this statement without first truly understanding
what you are trying to say. I think it was this, but please confirm:
"Therefore, the latter is probably the way you like doing it as well"
>I keep on telling that there should be tried to avoid writing JavaScript
in
an ASPNET project. That there can be cases to use it is something I told
already in my first reply.

Hey no insult in this paragraph! Good for you!
You're really coming along on that anger management program.

Look Cor, I'm not sure why you feel like you have to put me down.
Its not a bad thing that your English is lacking, and you shouldn't be
ashamed of it.
And when I point it out to you, I definately am not intending any
insult, and I apologise if it came across that way. I just think you
need to move on from this issue and get back to helping the general
community, rather than trying to somehow show the world what a bad
person I am simply because I have a point of view. Then we would get on
just fine.

Talk soon,
Steven

Sep 27 '06 #19

P: n/a
Gentlemen (if you are gentlemen)

Behave yourselves!!!

Jørgen

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <no************@planet.nlskrev i en meddelelse
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
I keep it with Juan's advice, however because you asked to answer me on
that.

Have a look at this page, the word "Like" has more meanings in English do
you know.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/like

The way you used it was not the way like it was meant or that I like.

Cor
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comschreef in bericht
news:11********************@m7g2000cwm.googlegroup s.com...
Hi Cor, and thanks for the insults regarding my coding style which you
have never seen before.

Answers inline...
You are an Aussie,
Thankyou for enlightening me.
most of those are not understandable by people at the
northern side of the world by persons who are not speaking English as
their
first language, and mostly we think: Why is that language not called
Aussies?
Ok so are you suggesting that people on the southern side of the world
who don't speak English CAN understand the Australian accent? Look I
can handle it if you feel like it makes you important when you insult
me, but to insult my entire country is a bit rich don't you think?
However coming back to the OP's question where you have at least now
answered my question and tells to everybody that they *must* use
JavaScript
in an ASPNET page, than I think that your code probably is mostly
horrible,
not maintainable and slow performing.
When did I say that everybody MUST use Javascript? Are you sure you
aren't confusing me with someone else?
I have seen projects without code behind, however completely filled up
with
2 kinds of program language code in the HTML page. I understand now
that
you
prefer that.
How can you understand anything about me without even understanding the
English language? And wouldn't your code behind then have 3 types of
language code (C#, generated HTML, and generated Javascript)?
Personally I think that there are situations for inserting it in both
places. Master pages immediately come to mind...
Therefore the later is probably the way like you are doing it as well.
I don't want to answer this statement without first truly understanding
what you are trying to say. I think it was this, but please confirm:
"Therefore, the latter is probably the way you like doing it as well"
I keep on telling that there should be tried to avoid writing
JavaScript
in
an ASPNET project. That there can be cases to use it is something I
told
already in my first reply.
Hey no insult in this paragraph! Good for you!
You're really coming along on that anger management program.

Look Cor, I'm not sure why you feel like you have to put me down.
Its not a bad thing that your English is lacking, and you shouldn't be
ashamed of it.
And when I point it out to you, I definately am not intending any
insult, and I apologise if it came across that way. I just think you
need to move on from this issue and get back to helping the general
community, rather than trying to somehow show the world what a bad
person I am simply because I have a point of view. Then we would get on
just fine.

Talk soon,
Steven


Sep 27 '06 #20

P: n/a
Cor, its ok.
I forgive you.
Even though you can't see the error of your ways, I forgive you.

Sep 27 '06 #21

P: n/a
"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@i42g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
I'm in Australia.
Time travels differently here.
Something to do with the hole in the ozone layer.
It seems a little strange that you constantly criticise someone's use of
English, yet you can't even spell the word "meant" correctly...
Sep 27 '06 #22

P: n/a
Steven,

When I am hit on one cheek, I always show my other cheek.

:-)

Cor

"Steven Nagy" <le*********@hotmail.comschreef in bericht
news:11**********************@m7g2000cwm.googlegro ups.com...
Cor, its ok.
I forgive you.
Even though you can't see the error of your ways, I forgive you.

Sep 27 '06 #23

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.