The way I look at it is through the patterns and the nesting of fractals.
The order of events in the the internals usually goes to completion with translation finally emerging from the series. Then after translation to get to an end of a pattern move, the next pair is often a H-H as an internal which is then followed by transaltion.
So my reply is to look closely at the small very sub sub pattern within a two bar yellow made up of a H-H. There you see declining volume into a sub sub rtl followed by increasing volume after the sub sub rtl.
Here is an example. The FOMC news.
Move 1 was short and the two bar yellow was a before and after shot (bar 54 and 55). So you see an H-H composed the way I explained in a subsub context.
Move 2 was an IBGS on 55, then 56 and the beginning of 57. Again the sub sub rtl was crossed on 57's beginning in that H-H.
Move 3 was short and expired on the IBGS of bar 59.
The context is now the short tape overlap with a potential long tape on a BBT 1 long where we need, by CP 4, a point 2 for the tape outside of the thick red RTL. No H-H here since the short wa over in the bar 59 and it was long before the bar close.
H-H's are called this since the close to open is a hinge at a bar extreme (one end or another.)
I hope I prevented you from using a shape (H-H) to become a rule and, instead, you are using the mind building of patterns and fractals being nested and the three mind operators of spatial, shape and movement.
i brought into play different aspects of SCT in each post and illustration. I'm sure everyone unfamiliar with doing the mind building learning process is inclined to make the usual judgements to reject what I have suggested in relation to trends. 4 o out 5 people do this and then go on about their business. A few people feel the need to steer as many people away from this as possible. This approach to discourage people is very helpful to those who agree with these detractors.