PostgreSQL's documented position indicates the standard does matter. Conformance to the standard is described as a "target" rather than PosrtgreSQL's feature s

PostgreSQL's documented position indicates the standard does matter. Conformance to the standard is described as a "target" rather than PosrtgreSQL's feature set as being "defining". This stands to reason: you can't conform to a target without the target pre-existing and you'd already be conformant if you were setting the standard. PostgreSQL's current documentation states: "PostgreSQL development aims for conformance with the latest official version of the standard where such conformance does not contradict traditional features or common sense." -- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/features.html https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/features.html This basic stance is documented at least as far back as PostgreSQL 7.3: "PostgreSQL development tends to aim for conformance with the latest official version of the standard where such conformance does not contradict traditional features or common sense. At the time of this writing, ballotting is under way for a new revision of the standard, which, if approved, will eventually become the conformance target for future PostgreSQL development." -- https://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/features.html https://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/features.html I can only assume that the person you're responding to is advocating a personal opinion on what should count as the standard setting process for SQL (be that formal or informal). That person's opinion does not appear to be shared by the PostgreSQL team as if they believed that... they'd be conformant by definition and there would be no need to accommodate the standard. If they didn't care about the standard, presumably it wouldn't be listed as an "aim" in any capacity.