Trivial Ranges

[Nihixul]

Some trivials are reported in ranges, and I am not terribly certain if they are reported correctly. For example, silvery seagreen ribbon is given as

155<x<=156

(I think... but you will see what I mean in a bit.)

If indeed this statement is true, then the trivial (it's a whole number after all) is 156. I can only assume you mean the trivial is either 155 or 156, in which case you need 155<=x<=156.

Either way, the current method for displaying ranges has this slight notational bug, which might cause confusion for some.

[gnormy]

This topic was discussed during beta. One approach is to realize that the DB is not using conventional mathematical logical operators here when displaying trivials. See FAQ http://www.eqtraders.com/articles/article_page.php?article=g113&menustr=030000000000

Another approach is to look at how EQ provides trivial information. (Success + no Skill-Up + Not Trivial) means the trivial is higher than your current skill. (Success + Skill-Up + Not trivial) unable to determine if trivial is at the new skill level without doing further testing.

Hope that helps.

[Nihixul]

I don't understand what you mean. From what I read in that link, the usages of "<=", etc., were completely standard (once you realize "<=" is just a way of expressing the character for "less than or equal to", which does not have a single keystroke, something completely standard amongst mathematicians, at least).

My point was that EITHER

1.) they really meant the symbols they used. in this case, they should realize that (when we are only dealing with integers) K<x<=K+1 implies x=K+1, and that K<=x<K+1 implies x=K, so as to make clearer the stated trivial. in other words, for the case i mentioned in the original post, the trivial should just be listed as 156. what they have isn't wrong in this case, just a bit obfuscated.

OR

2.) they really meant 155<=x<=156, in which case this is just a regular-old bug.

[Krazick]

OK Let me give you an example of why this trivial is shown in this "bad" way...

Report # 1: Item X - Trivial is UNKNOWN made with A, B & C. No Skill Level or Trivial status was specified in the report.

Result: Item A, B, C and X are entered into the Database, and Recipe entered with a Trivial of UNKNOWN.

Report # 2: Item X - Trivial is > 50. Because the User is at Skill Level 50, succeeded, but did not get a Trivial Message, and DID NOT get a skill up.

Result: Recipe for Item X has Trivial updated as a lower end of '50', It is shown as Trivial > 50.

Report # 3: Item X - Trivial is < 52. Because the User is at a Skill Level of 52, succeeded and DID recieve a Trivial Message. (Obviously did not get a Skill up)

Result: Recipe for Item X has trivial updated with upper end of '52', it is now shown as Trivial 50 < x <= 52.

So far, so good... Trivial should be 51 or 52... now comes the kicker...

Report # 4: Item X - User is currently at Skill Level 51, Succeeds and DID NOT recieve a Trivial Message, AND DID get a skill up to Level 52.

Result # 4: Update the Trivial with a lower bound of 51? or a lower bound of 52?

Did the lack of a Trivial Message get generated BEFORE or AFTER The Skill Level was updated?

From not knowing which happened first, we cannot say with confidence whether it is Trivial at 51 or at 52.

The only way to be sure is if:

Report # 5: Item X - User is currently at Skill Level 51, Succeeds, DID NOT get a Skill Up, and DID or DID NOT get a Trivial Message.

But not everyone when reporting trivials is this exact. Most are, but sometimes mistakes happen.

Does this help explain our dilema?

[gnormy]

Gnormy good at doings not at xplainings. This is not a bug - its working as intended.

[Nihixul]

I don't understand what the confusion is all about. My point was simple:

The statement 155<x<=156 is a very long way of saying (since we are dealing with integers) x=156.


I was implying that, either within the database, or in the displaying modules, or however you have written this, such changes should be made. If indeed it was determined at some point that the trivial was higher than 155, but not higher than (this is the same as less than or equal to) 156, then the trivial is 156! If these facts were not determined in testing the item, then you don't mean 155<x<=156.

It doesn't matter how you interpret the incoming data or whether you make it all up: if you display 155<x<=156, you might as well just display 156. Please tell me someone else sees my point. I am not talking about how we determine trivials, or how trivial/skill-up messages are displayed, etc. I am just saying that, if I know an integer (for whatever reason) is <= 156 and also > 155, then I know it is 156. :P

Regarding the actual gathering of information, result number 4 is not ambiguous: if you get a skill-up from 51 to 52 on an item, then it wasn't trivial at 51. Why? Had it been, you would not be able to skill-up from 51 to 52. In other words, (if we assume we had already narrowed it down to 521 or 52), we know the trivial to be 52.

[Nihixul]

should read "narrowed it down to 51 or 52"... sorry.

[Krazick]

Regarding the actual gathering of information, result number 4 is not ambiguous: if you get a skill-up from 51 to 52 on an item, then it wasn't trivial at 51. Why? Had it been, you would not be able to skill-up from 51 to 52. In other words, (if we assume we had already narrowed it down to 51 or 52), we know the trivial to be 52.

Hmm... ok... maybe my example was not what I really thought I was trying to say... ops:

I am gonna back peddle a little and state something a little less nice, and a bit more "rude" (why, because this is an annoying problem, that has no good answer).

There are reports by folks that are not always CLEAR as to the Trivial Level. And the best interpretation we can make is ending up with a trivial range that looks like '155 < x <= 156'. If you ask us "How can that be?"... we say "BECAUSE!"... Simply get off our back about it... repeat the recipe YOURSELF, at Skill 155 and at 156 and Confirm it for us. Don't try and bully us into shrinking the trivial to an exact unless you have actually done it! :evil:

The fact we get various reports, by various people, and don't tie current trivials back to the report, little niggles like this will creep in. We have it narrowed down to two possible trivials. Help us by confirming it. Don't whine about it. :twisted:

[Nihixul]

There are reports by folks that are not always CLEAR as to the Trivial Level. And the best interpretation we can make is ending up with a trivial range that looks like '155 < x <= 156'. If you ask us "How can that be?"... we say "BECAUSE!"... Simply get off our back about it... repeat the recipe YOURSELF, at Skill 155 and at 156 and Confirm it for us. Don't try and bully us into shrinking the trivial to an exact unless you have actually done it! :evil:

I am not talking about anything at all contingent upon everquest, tradeskills, or skill-ups. I am talking about how the statement
155<x<=156
is the same as
156
when talking about ANYTHING INVOLVING ONLY INTEGER VALUES.

What is so hard to understand about that? This will be my last post on this thread and maybe on these boards. I cannot believe how silly this has become. I am not bullying anyone into anything. I was only trying to help the site by pointing out something that was an obvious candidate for improvement. The way this trivial is listed currently is unnecessarily obfuscated and might easily confuse others.

It doesn't matter if I repeat the experiments. What line of experiments would you like people to try that would result in our saying "the trivial is greater than 155 but not larger than 156", BUT NOT in our saying "the trivial is 156"? I will answer that for you: no line of experiments, because those statements are equivalent. THAT was my point. If you know the ONE statement, you know the OTHER.

I maintain I was never rude or personal about any of this. I am still incredulous as to how this simple point is still not being understood, but whatever. In the end, it isn't that important to *me*, because I for one will be able to understand the trivial listings fine.

[moggie]

Report # 3: Item X - Trivial is < 52. Because the User is at a Skill Level of 52, succeeded and DID recieve a Trivial Message. (Obviously did not get a Skill up)

Result: Recipe for Item X has trivial updated with upper end of '52', it is now shown as Trivial 50 < x <= 52.

So far, so good... Trivial should be 51 or 52... now comes the kicker...

If the item was trivial ( report 3 ) then then if trivial can't be 52. If they are reals then it is in the range 50 < trivial < 52 . It must be 51 if its an int.

But not everyone when reporting trivials is this exact. Most are, but sometimes mistakes happen.

Does this help explain our dilema?

Now here is why what you say can make sense. The reporters are not always completely accurate and people don't understand how this is coded exactly. You also assume that skill level and trivs are ints wtrivialsgiven +5% skills could easily be reals.

Your gui to display this information is wrong because if people assume trivs are ints thetrivialstements such as 155<x<=156 where x is an int are equiverlent to x=156 to a mathematician.

I am not a mathematician but I know a man who is....

[Krazick]

Nihixul..

I tried to explain it one way... and put my foot in my mouth.

I tried to be a little rude... and say "Stop complaining. We know it is a little flakey... Help us."

I am gonna try again. And I am gonna lock this thread because I am tired of the issue. I want it to go away.

------

When reports come in, it gets Updated in the database based on the report.

Report # 2 (from My example previously reported) Would set the Trivial > 50.

Report # 3 would set the Trivial to 50 < x <= 52.

SO... the Trivial at this point SHOULD BE 51 or 52.

Now, given Report # 4 is ignored... (why? because I can't read it clearly, and I am tired)...

Report # 5 - I am Skill Level 51, Made X, it was reported Trivial.

Now, Because I am Tired (again)... I go in and set the UPPER BOUND of the Trivial to 51. And LEAVE the Lower Bound Alone (at 50).

It is shown as 50 < x <= 51.

LOGICALLY, the Trivial is now fixed at 51. But, without going back and having a confirmation that at 50 It was NOT trivial, and 51 it IS Trivial, the Original Report #2 COULD HAVE BEEN I was at 49, and Skilled up to 50 and did NOT Get a Trivial Report. But the Reporting Person could have said it was NOT Trivial at 50 (although it really wasn't trivial at 49), but Report #2 was flakey.

ALL I am really asking, is that we get a confirmation from somebody else who made the item whether it was trivial at 50 or at 51.

For such a MINOR little thing, where the Trivial is ONE of TWO numbers, and the fact that out of over 6000 recipes, we have < 10 Recipes (guess) that have this as a problem...

STOP WHINING ABOUT IT! IT IS A PROBLEM WE KNOW ABOUT. AND NO, the change you request to

50 <= x <= 51

or

TRIVIAL = 51

WILL NOT BE DONE!

[Krazick]

OK... Having slept over night, and cooled off...

I am sorry I lost my temper over this. I was Wrong.

The problem reported here is a small one, affecting a very few recipes. And it stems from the in-exact and sometimes conflicting reports. And at times the mis-entering of the data into the system.

All that I really ask is that the recipe be tried at both ends to get a confirmation of the exact trivial.

Again, I am sorry I got steamed... but this is just an annoying problem.

[Ngreth Thergn]

And there will be a few inconsitancies like this until we get a proper report for those few items that have that tiny range. BECAUSE we are not always clear on the low end... weirdness like that will happen.