Thats all good and fine but doesn’t change your incorrect impression about the size of a color gamut you have provided and believe (believed?).
I'm confused. I've been referring to sRGB, Adobe RGB (1998) and Prophoto.
These color spaces. And showing samples of images whose gamuts
exceeded sRGB. Presented like this because it is easier to visualize as an interactive 3D plot than it is with Photoshop's soft proof out-of-gamut tool.
Assuming that the tool is quick and easy to use, like mine is.
What color shifts and posterization?
The kind that can happen if an image is edited in a large space, such as Prophoto, and is exported as sRGB without careful examination. If the gamut of the image exceeds sRGB, which can happen to an image that didn't start out exceeding sRGB, but had had, say, the saturation pumped up while the image was in Prophoto (which has colors that aren't visible on any known monitor.)
Anther use case. I've done a lot of camera scanning of negatives and I've found that it is best to use Prophoto throughout when inverting and color processing the negative. Often when I'm done editing, I have to carefully unsaturate a few colors while in ProPhoto before converting it to sRGB. Possibly images that don't originate as film negatives aren't as problematic when converting from Prophoto to sRGB.
My modern "originated as digital" images usually are in sRGB through the whole process, from ACR out to saving as 8 bit JPEG (in addition to as 16 bit TIFF.)
The controversy might be "people who place a lot of emphasis on printing" talking past people that don't. And vice versa.