Naming convention and list of ICs
There are a lot of examples of this and it was / is done to convey equivalence of functionality. The devil is in the details, though.

The xx1117 low dropout regulator is made by at least 3 companies, but their guidance on the output capacitor is different in all 3 cases (the capacitor ESR is critical for proper operation).

For logic, there is the xx4000 series (CMOS); CD4xxx was originally from RCA and (what was then) Motorola SPS had their equivalent MC14000 series (the only difference is the leading '1').

The world of op-amps has many examples of this (particularly the OPxxx series) but the details are often different (they are often referred to as 'improved' which to an engineer means 'different').

Serial port interfaces (such as the MAX232 and variants) are widely multiple sourced.

The key issue is that the operational voltages and various timings are not necessarily guaranteed to be the same, although devices with a committee specified pinout and operational features will meet that specification (such as in DDRx SDRAM); this is why designing to the specification rather than just the datasheet (which may be far better than the requirement) can be advantageous in case one source of supply becomes unavailable.

The venerable (and ancient) 741 op-amp is also available from multiple vendors, as is the 555 timer (in TTL and CMOS variants) as are many transistors (such as the 2N series) and diodes (1N series for example).

Bottom line: Yes, there are numerous examples of multiple vendors using the same naming convention across analog and digital parts, but beware and read the datasheet carefully.