To answer the thread title, yes. That is the historical Enneagram.. It's dominant for a reason and if that seems ambiguous it just means there is more material to uncover. The primary type and the lines have so much depth it isn't even funny.
All you are telling me is that you can't speak to the depth, so you 'code' it with a parroted school of thought. What does this even mean?
The aim is to uncover what is existing, individually, for a person. Chances are, whatever you find will be consonant with general theory, it's organic after all? But it takes an investment, eg, self awareness, emotional honesty (even when it's ugly), partial release of the E-type, willingness to exist with something uncomfortable.
The primary non-starter for me with all these 'tri-type' things is that it's left so 'surface and behavioral', (convenient accessibility?) when humans are actually messy as fuck, full of emotions, fears and desires.
The only alternative theory that I have is that "tri-type" was created for people who wish not to access these things.