How accurate are (relative) Photoluminescence/Fluorescence Quantum...

Photoluminescence quantum yields (PLQY) represent one of, if not the, most important characteristic of a fluorophore. I would say there are two different wide-spread versions to record them:

Relative PLQY: the emission spectrum of a fluorophore is compared to a different flurophore with known PLQY (so-called standard).
Absolute PLQY: by using an integrating sphere, a fluorophore's PLQY can be determined without any further reference measurement.

PLQY can either be indicated as decimals, with values between 0 and 1, or as a percentage, with values between 0 % and 100%. When you read about the accuracy in the determination of PLQY, you will find statements such as:"It should be noted that the accuracy of the determination of fluorescence quantum yields cannot be better than 5–10%, due to the small additive errors relevant to the absorbances at the excitation wavelength, the correction factors of the detection system and the quantum yield of the standard." ( Valeur, B.; Berberan-Santos, M.N. Molecular Fluorescence: Principles and Applications; Second.; Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim, Germany, 2012; page 161)However, what does this 5-10 % mean? Is this indicating a relative or an absolute error of PLQY determination? Or, in different words, how accurately can you assign a PLQY? To illustrate, two examples.I determine the PLQY of a fluorophore as 0.80. If I take the 5 % as relative error, I could not write it more accurately than "0.80 ± 0.04", but as an absolute error, I could never describe it more accurately than "0.80 ± 0.05".For a different fluorophore, I find a PLQY of 0.20. With relative error, this would be "0.20 ± 0.01", with absolute error, "0.20 ± 0.05"I find the interpretation as a relevant error counter intuitive, as this means that weak fluorophores have a much smaller (absolute) error than strong fluorophores. In the interpretation as an absolute error, small fluorophores have a much higher relative error, which I find intuitive. However, I feel like a large part of the chemistry community has no problem with publishing a "PLQY = 0.005 ± 0.0003", saying they measured it three times and the relative error is in the order of 5-10 % (let's ignore significant digits here for a second). However, this would be two orders of magnitude more accurate than a determined PLQY of 0.50!Am I completely on the wrong track here and do I have a completely wrong understanding of accuracy? it only adds to the confusion that a lot of the literature reports PLQY in percentage.Mind you, this discussion only holds for relative PLQY measurements. For absolute PLQY, the error is 0.02 in the absence of systematic errors (dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51718-4). This only increase my doubts on the above interpretation as a relative error, as this would mean that absolute PLQY measurements are only more accurate than relative ones for fluorophores with PLQY > 0.40.