In principle, the concept behind Wayland looks great. And yes, it was (and to some, is) intended to replace the Xwindow system.
The problem with Wayland is one of existing Infrastructure, something that Wayland fans blithely ignore, or, in Truest of Gnome Style, like to claim is someone else's problem.
It is not every other x11 dependent app developers problem. It is Waylands problem.
Wayland did not plan ahead for any kind of viable transition from X, they merely approached it with Loud Fanfare to promote Wayland, then sat back with expectations that everyone would jump on board. And few did. Because while the principle of a slightly faster and less complex windowing system has appeal, it just isn't that noticeably faster than X to the end user and to the developers, is a horrifying nightmare of complete redevelopment of apps.
Partly because of this, Wayland lacks true Contributor Support which it desperately needs to progress. Like Duke Nukem Vaporware, Canonical will persist in promoting it with High Hopes, but no army to back up their bluster with.
X11 has its problems... But at least it works and it works well enough. And in some regards, I find it superior to Wayland, in spite of the fantastic appeal in Wayland compositor being the window server and talking directly with the kernel.