it's a technique I used to show the same file several ways... one is
directly into excel, the other was as a html table and now as
javascript data.
Fun stuff... I like re-using content, imagine if the data was large,
and already in the cache, a quick right click to save the file already
has the data in the cache!
the code was slapped together, it was just the technique that I felt
is often overlooked for the lightest weight solution for large data
sets.
I know you can use the technique (and not the little plugin) to
lighten the load!
On 3/8/07, Daemach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I understand now and thanks for the script. That would reduce the size of
> the download somewhat.
>
> As a reference, the json ser/deser component we use in cold fusion defines a
> recordset object as a set of arrays. This is to keep with the wddx
> standard, though it differs slightly by sticking all of the columns under a
> data node rather than in the root.
>
> query.columnlist // [col1,col2]
> query.recordcount // 2
> query.data // contains arrays of columns
> query.data.col1 = [col1row1,col1row2]
> query.data.col2 = [col2row1,col2row2]
>
> so if my columns were name and email, to get the 5th email record it would
> be query.data.email[4]. to loop over a column (to search it perhaps) would
> be:
>
> for (i in query.data.col1){
> if (i.indexOf("whatever") != -1) do something;
> }
>
>
>
>
> Ⓙⓐⓚⓔ wrote:
> >
> > it's similar to Json, but no field names that get repeated for each
> > record.
> >
> > you do an ajax request , get the response and split it with "\n", now
> > you have an array of records, then you split each record with "\t" and
> > you've got a 2 dimensional array.. all the data in perhaps half the
> > size.
> >
> > if you really want it as an array of objects you need a header record,
> > which gets split with "/t" then loop thru it assigning the array
> > elements to an object field.
> >
> > Does this sound like what you would need for extra light weight
> > transport? I could draft a plugin, it's not rocket surgery!
> >
> >
> > On 3/8/07, Daemach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jake, you are famous for this ;)
> >>
> >> Sounds great in theory but an example of how to accomplish this and the
> >> reasoning behind that claim would be very helpful!
> >>
> >> I meant lightweight in terms of querying more than page size, by the way.
> >> I
> >> should have been more clear.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Ⓙⓐⓚⓔ wrote:
> >> >
> >> > if you're pushing the limit for 'light weight', consider simple tab
> >> > delimited data! a simple header and you can convert it to Javascript
> >> > in a few lines of code! Not as easy as an eval, but the speed will be
> >> > worth it!
> >> >
> >> > On 3/8/07, Daemach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> While discussing json support in Cold Fusion with Rey Bango, I had a
> >> >> small
> >> >> flash of insight. It's a pretty easy matter to take a recordset or
> >> any
> >> >> other structure, serialize it to JSON format and output that string
> >> >> inside
> >> >> of an eval() directly in the HTML itself. With jQuery and the ready()
> >> >> function when the page loads you could have a client-side dataset
> >> ready
> >> >> to
> >> >> go. Why make ajax calls when you can query a client-side datasource
> >> for
> >> >> things like an auto-complete list?
> >> >>
> >> >> So the questions are:
> >> >>
> >> >> -- What are the limits the browser can handle in terms of record count
> >> >> and
> >> >> still retain a lightweight feel? (depends on RAM, processor speed - I
> >> >> know,
> >> >> but generally...)
> >> >> -- What would the optimal structure look like for searching given a
> >> >> function
> >> >> like an auto-complete form field?
> >> >> -- Is a "for in" loop the best way to query or is there something more
> >> >> efficient?
> >> >> -- What benefits, if any, would this have for filtering/sorting a
> >> table?
> >> >>
> >> >> Or is this a bad idea to start with? Obviously ajax still has its
> >> place,
> >> >> but it seems like this concept might work for some things...
> >> >> --
> >> >> View this message in context:
> >> >>
> >> http://www.nabble.com/Querying-javascript-datasources---what-factors-improve-speed-efficiency--tf3373312.html#a9387190
> >> >> Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> jQuery mailing list
> >> >> discuss@jquery.com
> >> >> http://jquery.com/discuss/
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Ⓙⓐⓚⓔ - יעקב ʝǡǩȩ ᎫᎪᏦᎬ
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > jQuery mailing list
> >> > discuss@jquery.com
> >> > http://jquery.com/discuss/
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:
> >> http://www.nabble.com/Querying-javascript-datasources---what-factors-improve-speed-efficiency--tf3373312.html#a9387322
> >> Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> jQuery mailing list
> >> discuss@jquery.com
> >> http://jquery.com/discuss/
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ⓙⓐⓚⓔ - יעקב ʝǡǩȩ ᎫᎪᏦᎬ
> > _______________________________________________
> > jQuery mailing list
> > discuss@jquery.com
> > http://jquery.com/discuss/
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Querying-javascript-datasources---what-factors-improve-speed-efficiency--tf3373312.html#a9388247
> Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jQuery mailing list
> discuss@jquery.com
> http://jquery.com/discuss/
>
--
Ⓙⓐⓚⓔ - יעקב ʝǡǩȩ ᎫᎪᏦᎬ
_______________________________________________
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
