A screen-filling object's projected pixel diagonal, expressed as a multiple
of the fitted screen axis (fittedAxisPx): hypot(aspect, 1) / min(aspect, 1). This is aspect-DEPENDENT (1.41 at 1:1 up to 3.69 at 32:9 — see the
FILL_FACTOR doc above for the full spread); the constant below is
anchored at the 16:9 reference aspect (2.04, rounded to a plain 2),
the same aspect FILL_FACTOR is calibrated at, NOT an average or a fit
across the mainstream range — it is exact (to ~2%) only near 16:9 and gets
markedly less accurate at more extreme aspects (e.g. ~28% off at a real
21:9 panel). Named so the MAX_COVERAGE_FRACTION coupling reads as what
it is — coverage metric of a screen-filling object ≈ SCREEN_FILL_DIAGONAL_RATIO / FILL_FACTOR (approximately, at mainstream
aspect ratios) — rather than an unexplained 1 / FILL_FACTOR, which was
only exact under the old (diagonal) normalisation, at every aspect ratio.
A screen-filling object's projected pixel diagonal, expressed as a multiple of the fitted screen axis (
fittedAxisPx):hypot(aspect, 1) / min(aspect, 1). This is aspect-DEPENDENT (1.41 at 1:1 up to 3.69 at 32:9 — see theFILL_FACTORdoc above for the full spread); the constant below is anchored at the 16:9 reference aspect (2.04, rounded to a plain2), the same aspectFILL_FACTORis calibrated at, NOT an average or a fit across the mainstream range — it is exact (to ~2%) only near 16:9 and gets markedly less accurate at more extreme aspects (e.g. ~28% off at a real 21:9 panel). Named so theMAX_COVERAGE_FRACTIONcoupling reads as what it is —coverage metric of a screen-filling object ≈ SCREEN_FILL_DIAGONAL_RATIO / FILL_FACTOR(approximately, at mainstream aspect ratios) — rather than an unexplained1 / FILL_FACTOR, which was only exact under the old (diagonal) normalisation, at every aspect ratio.