Squalou, I didn't realize you were shooting for that, so it wasn't part of my mental calculations. But let me make sure I understand...
Are you saying that if the TF setting is set to a hard number (e.g., M1), then any (and all) CZ's painted on the M1 chart should then also show up on any higher TF as you click higher and higher up the TF scale in addition to the CZ's found naturally on the higher TF? Or that all H4 objects should translate downwards all the way to M1, in addition to all the CZ's found naturally on the lower time frames in between?
Is this the idea?
If it is, then I think it would be best to only allow lower TF objects to show up on higher, but not the other way around. I think I can see how the condensed painted zones from a lower TF showing up on a higher one could possibly act like an S/R line, but that's about it. Otherwise, I think we're setting ourselves up for massive confusion later on when no one's charts look anything alike.
Are you saying that if the TF setting is set to a hard number (e.g., M1), then any (and all) CZ's painted on the M1 chart should then also show up on any higher TF as you click higher and higher up the TF scale in addition to the CZ's found naturally on the higher TF? Or that all H4 objects should translate downwards all the way to M1, in addition to all the CZ's found naturally on the lower time frames in between?
Is this the idea?
If it is, then I think it would be best to only allow lower TF objects to show up on higher, but not the other way around. I think I can see how the condensed painted zones from a lower TF showing up on a higher one could possibly act like an S/R line, but that's about it. Otherwise, I think we're setting ourselves up for massive confusion later on when no one's charts look anything alike.
To improve is to change. To perfect, is to change often.