The following theorem can be used to demonstrate that a statistic is minimal sufficient:
Let $f(X|\theta)$ be the pmf or pdf of a sample X. Suppose $\exists$ a function $T(X)$ such that, for every two samples X and Y:
$\frac{f(X|\theta)}{f(Y|\theta)} \amalg \theta$ iff $T(X) = T(Y)$.
Then $T(X)$ is a minimal suffienct statistic for $\theta$.
(Reference: Casella & Berger Theorem 6.2.13.)
I'm confused about how this works when the densities contain indicator functions. Here is an example that I constructed in order to confuse myself:
Let $X_{i}$ and $Y_{i} \sim Unif(0,\theta)$. Let $I$ be the indicator function. Then:
$$ \frac{f(X|\theta)}{f(Y|\theta)} = \frac{ I( max(X) < \theta ) \cdot I( min(X) > 0 ) }{ I( max(Y) < \theta ) \cdot I( min(Y) > 0 )}$$
We'll forget about the ratio of the second indicator functions because it's already independent of $\theta$. So the question becomes, "When is the ratio of the first indicator terms independent of $\theta$?" The ratio will be 1 if $I( max(X) < \theta ) = I( max(Y) < \theta ) = 1$. If $I( max(X) < \theta ) = I( max(Y) < \theta ) = 0$, I'm hazy on what to do because the denominator is 0, but at least the ratio shouldn't depend on $\theta$. Okay -- so $max(X)$ is a candidate MSS, and it fulfills the "if" direction.
Let's look at the "only if" direction. If $max(X) \ne max(Y)$, then the ratio is either $1/0$ or $0/1$. To my mind, these are independent of $\theta$ regardless of any function of $X$ or $Y$. But this conclusion doesn't make any sense; therefore the premise that I understand indicator functions and minimal sufficiency is wrong.
I'd love some guidance to set my understanding straight.