I've encountered SAUCE, long since; but the page is right. I've personally never directly encountered XBIN, and it does seem that it did not take off as predicted.
* https://acid.org/images/0896/XBIN.TXT
The world does not seem to have managed to do for text (art image) files what TIFF did for graphics files. Although https://16colo.rs/ , recently on Hacker News (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44665816) seems to be getting by on just SAUCE plus FILE_ID.DIZ.
See https://github.com/ansilove/ansilove#features , for one example of what we have instead. (-:
I would have quipped that someone has yet to have the idea of using JSON instead of these directly-machine-readable binary formats. But the DurDraw developers have indeed done that very thing.
SAUCE has proven quite resilient and adaptable. I don't think it really works for describing newer developments like like Utf-8, 256 color or RGB ANSI art. It maybe misses some vintage platforms like ATASCII. But that could change with a format update. For MS-DOS and Amiga ANSI art packs, and some nicher formats like Xbin, it's pretty standard.
XBIN files have been scattered around artscene packs since the 90s, but since it is directly tied to VGA hardware, it remains niche. Some people really like it. I have always found it tricky to work with.
I like to think the DUR (durdraw) format can be adopted or extended to describe most text art, though custom font support like Xbin is not in the current version. I also like to think that DUR's JSON core makes it easier for mortals and programmers to play with than SAUCE's dense binary format (and ANSI escape codes, even), but that's a bit subjective.