The closest that comes to minds is ULID[0]. It is short (26 character base32), 128 bit and lexicographically sortable.
I think the reason there's no other popular standard is you give up something. 128 bit gives a pretty low risk of collisions in almost all uses, but as you go smaller you start having to consider the specific scenario and impact, etc, which doesn't work well for a standard.
You could use another encoding (eg base64 or base85) to get it shorter, but you start sacrificing other things (case sensitivity, url-safeness) - again, not great for a standard.
For my own project, I went with base32-encoded UUIDv7, prefixed with type name (a la Stripe ids). Compared to ULID, it's still lexicopraphically sortable, but is backed by an actual standard, so a bit more sound IMO.
UUIDv7 will only work until year 4147 (compared with ULID's 10889AD), but by then I think we'll have another UUID version we can switch to.
I think the reason there's no other popular standard is you give up something. 128 bit gives a pretty low risk of collisions in almost all uses, but as you go smaller you start having to consider the specific scenario and impact, etc, which doesn't work well for a standard.
You could use another encoding (eg base64 or base85) to get it shorter, but you start sacrificing other things (case sensitivity, url-safeness) - again, not great for a standard.
[0] https://github.com/ulid/spec