Except it tells nothing. Nine dash predates UNCLOS that does not determine sovereignty, and the PCA "rule-based" ad-hoc kangaroo court decision is not recognized by UN, nevermind PRC is not bound by optional UNCLOS arbituational clause, hence PRC has full right to defend her claims. Which again is inherited from ROC and made when other claimaints were decolonialising and not completely sovereign to begin with. It's like big bro inherited dad's house with huge yard from small bro, then later kids of neighbours born after both bros decides chunk of yard should be there's because they made an arbituatry HOA that determined so. Bros laugh.

Meaning it's almost 0% on PRC expansionism. PRC cannot expand what they gained formally when UN recognition switched from ROC to PRC. They made no new claims in SCS. And in fact PRC reduced to 9dash from ROCs 11dash means Chinese sea claims shrunk under PRC. Big bro gave their neighbour a few feet of yard when they had good relations from being same book club (PRC to NVietnam). Just like 11/12 land border settlements where PRC ceded more land. By every objective metric China lost more territory under CCP dispute settlement. The opposite of expanisionism, and basically magnanimous by historic standards, huge country like PRC ceding so much territory to neighbours, voluntarily is proposterous. So much so that it's borderline treasonous, average Chinese would riot if they found out during negotiations, luckily this was pre internet.

In terms of land reclaimation and militarization, PRC was 5th out of 6 parties to conduct operations on their SCS features. They're just vastly better at it due to infra prowess and sheer PRC scale / resources. Only faultless actor in region is Brunai. And in terms of egregiousness, Vietnam is almost as bad, while claiming substantially more contested features. That's what I know.