As I understand it, yes. This has the potential upsides of better integration and maybe a better fit for a theoretically post-X11 world.  Another hopeful upside it "fewer years of Martin's life lost to frustration, etc". It might also help people find and solve the issue with gtk/gdk opening/closing/reopening display connections, but that doesn't seem certain to me: they asked for a simpler case than "all of emacs", and I'm not sure that "a different emacs" will be sufficient. I base this skepticism on the understanding that there is no doubt that the problem exists or (roughly) where, but rather that it is worth the required effort from the limited pool of people who are in position to do it.

I can't help but notice that Wayland offers a potential "solution" by simply not supporting the underlying functionality that triggers the problem. In terms of "kicking the can down the road", the basic Wayland approach is "We're making something that you might use as a can. We do not promise that 'kicking' will apply to it, and explicitly disclaim any concept of 'road'." They're doing this to keep the problem more tractable; the emacs/gtk bug is one example of the sort of thing that they're explicitly labelling "Somebody Else's Problem".

Again, I hope this helps,

~Chad