images are done and shown in RGB and monitored as such
I love the shapes and textures of those heathery hills, contrasting with the square and plain house... lovely.
sRGB? The whole thing with different screens is a point - I've noticed that especially bright saturated colours can be rather different on different screens. I splashed out on a Datacolor screen calibration device about 18 months ago, at the same time that I needed a new monitor. This gives me some confidence that my colours "are" what I'm seeing, combined with the fact that my screen covers 100% of the sRGB colour space. (not perfect but better than nothing).
BUT the whole point is rendered a little moot by the fact that most people viewing my images won't be calibrated.
And again, my cheap laptop (not my main PC), even though I calibrated it, is simply incapable of displaying some colours...
Oh well. It's so much easier when everyone is looking at the same piece of photographic paper!
My most recent foray into colour management is trying to calibrate my cameras - I purchased a little ColorChecker card with 24 color patches on it, and some software called Lumariver Profile Designer which creates ICC profiles that are accepted by Darktable. It took me a while to get my head around the all options, but got there eventually. Turns out, (to my slight disappointment!) darktable's rendering of both my Nikon and Olympus RAW files is already very accurate, without special profiles, but I am seeing a slight improvement in some colours - I think... On the other hand, it proved what I suspected, that is that the Nikon's JPEG colours, while pleasing to the eye, have some whopping hue shifts going on.