Also note that the sRGB color model is not tuned to model the human vision: it is based on the most common chromatic components of LCD panels used today. But their chromatic components (based on the chemical compound used, according to the narrow bandwidth of their wavelength of **emission**) are not centered correctly on the larger bandwidth wavelengths of **absorbtion** of human cones. That's why the perception of colors on these screens vary a lot between people (falsely accused to have "color vision defects").
If there's a defect, it's caused by the rendering technology for displays whose color gamut is too much restricted (something that editors of printed documents, already know since long, as they use many more color components than just 3): digital photography has not been a progress, argentic photography using many more chromatic components than just 3 were (and still are) much more accurate in terms of color gamut (let's not speak about use of colors in art: there are hundreds of distinct color components, not just 3 in the sRGB approximation) and most printers prefer the CMYK color model exactly for the same reason (also because of other effects like mutual aborbtions when inks drop are fused together or superposed, even if technologies of inks has also progressed, with much thinner grains, but with a limitation caused by diffusion on the surface of paper where droplets of inks will fuse together)
For now there does not exist any LCD panel using chromatic subpixels correctly centered on biological pigments present in human eyes (there has been some attempts, but the chemical compounds are unstable and don't have the stability found in animal cells; some researches are still in progress, using biotechnologies; the most significant progress has been those made in Korea by Samsung for its panels and notably with OLED based on **organic** chemical compounds that can better approximate the natural color pigments of human eyes),
