Hi Sylvian, On 6/20/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The solution you propose with an attached state is the same as the > x:dataTable's preserveDataModel attribute which solves the problem by ... > storing the data model.
I was quite deliberate in avoiding the assumption that we would need to store the entire data model, and I agree that preserveDataModel is too aggressive in this regard. Wouldn't it be sufficient to only capture the mapping for rows currently being displayed? For example, even if the whole data model has 1000 rows, but only 5 are being displayed, why would we need the mapping for the other 995 rows that are not displayed? Kind Regards, John Fallows.
