Yes, exactly. This idea works in the opposite direction as well.
No it really doesn't, not unless you want to use a simplistic (Garry like) cause and effect principle to suggest it does. Did you see the example of Bill's flower's in the closed post? Or my example of data clumping in dark saturated shadows in the same thread? We could plot the dE differences between what can and cannot be seen on a display but there's far more to the inferior output seen in those examples than a dE difference distance between visible and OOG colors and the effect on the conversions to print.
At least the difference, as in your illustration, is a maximum of 5 DeltaE.
Actually 6 but now go and convert ProPhoto to the output color space then sRGB to the output color space and the differences in how saturated colors are affected can be an issue as seen in Bill's examples. Suggesting or equating a small dE difference between what we can see between two color spaces on a display and the effect of the differing gamuts on conversions to print is something Gary might propose. Further, your capture device provided you this data. You are perhaps proposing we clip it solely so we can see some colors, while removing colors we can use for output. If you want to do that, go ahead. But retaining and using all the data is for many of us, far more critical than deleting color so we don't have to deal with colors we can't see on one device.
And, all one's editing decisions will be made while looking at sRGB(in this example).
That statement would only be valid if the only output for the data was your display. There are colors we can retain and print we can't see on the display but could see on the print. Or another person's display. Clipping them so you can see them on one device seems rather pointless unless you're sure the only reproduction will be on that one device.
Do you have a DSLR? If so, when you capture the full resolution image, do you resample down for the web or display and throw away the full resolution data? Even if you're sure the only output will be to the web? After you convert from raw to a TIFF or JPEG (assuming you shoot raw), when you are finished, do you delete the raw file?
So how do you now explain this stuff to the novice? Isn't that what this thread was about?
You show them the gamut maps compared to images as I did in my video. You tell them what I told you: do you want to clip colors you can't see on one device to edit them, colors that you
can use on another device? Or do you retain all the color data and carefully edit the image, soft proof and use that data? It is then up to them to decide what route to take.
Color data is often about color detail. The dE example I provide for you can't show you this, you have to do a test like Bill did and actually convert the data and print it. Assuming your goal is to print your data.
Assuming that the dE differences on a display between OOG colors of two color spaces equate to what comes off a print is like Gary assuming that Adobe RGB produce dull colors. The gamut of a print and display, the contrast ratio, ability to see subtle color details are different. And that's why a soft proof will never be a 100%, nor is anyone saying it can be. The gamut of the print space doesn't fit your display gamut either. But it is a better predicator of what your print should look like than not using it. A Polaroid never looked like a transparency but many of us shot Polaroids for testing a number of parameters before shooting film, and learned to judge the differences making the Polaroid, like the soft proof, useful.
