Agree, standards feels far too heavy.
For me I would see it more as friendly advice from the breeder. Showing that they actually know their product.
Even if they had a stab at the makeup and proclaimed it is based off no more than a 20 plant progeny test. That still works well enough to inform without it nailing the breeder to a set of standards.
As for those that publish any old bunk. Time (and packet results) themselves would shine a light on those who push false (or poorly researched data).
I think for the true breeders this maybe isn’t as difficult to have a stab at already. I read some of the GG#4 RIL threads and other such extensive breeding projects. Those guys can identify which different types of expression to expect. Early signs for which you have. etc etc. Not fall proof. But certainly confidence inspiring.