User blog comment:Reversion/What do you think of this?/@comment-25968376-20160107194219/@comment-25968376-20160108184706

>My understanding is that what I'm doing right now is the duplication part where each category was in a separate array what the secondary effect not sortable, just for viewing.

Correct. By doing it this way, we can't have any meaningful comparison between two treasures, since treasure A could have the effect we want to compare in the first position, while treasure B could have it in the second position. The app would have no way of knowing which other treasures have the same effect in the second position, so we would have to cross-check not only every treasure in the same category, but every treasure like in the long list anyway. However, if the treasures only had one effect each, this would be an easy way to group them together in the JSON file so you could get a quick glance of all treasures with a certain effect, just like the wiki table that you made.

>''I was going to put them in the category page.

http://cookierun.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Treasures_that_may_generate_Coin_Flowers''

That's perfectly fine for the wiki, and it's irrelevant to the discussion. This discussion is just how we would represent the data for an app. For the wiki categories, we don't care if we have duplicate data since we only care if a treasure has a desired effect or not.

For example, let's say we have a category "Things that are red" and we have the following links_

...
 * Fire trucks
 * Apples
 * Traffic lights

And let's say we have a category "Fruits" with the following links:


 * Apples
 * Bananas
 * Pears

So of course, for the wiki, it doesn't matter that we have listed Apples twice. The user should be able to find information about apples, no matter if he/she went via the category of "Things that are red", or "fruits". But for the app, we're not storing links, we're storing data. So that means instead of saying that we point to some information about Apples, we say "here's all info about Apples that I have". If the article is 500 pages long, naturally you wouldn't want to duplicate that in the file.

>If I'm not mistaken, the one huge array is basically the List of Treasures page

correct.

>and have it sortable by that?

Be careful what you mean by "that" here. Computers are stupid. What you have to do is define what makes treasure A comparable with treasure B. So in this approach you have to find all treasures that have the effect that you want to compare, either as the first or second position and make a temporary list out of that so we can discard all the other treasures. This is very easy to program, but this means we have to go through the whole list anyway, which isn't efficient either.