Your comment suggests ignorance on three fronts. First, you're suggesting that because Wayland is a "super-process" of Xorg, it has no value or purpose. This is not accurate, as Wayland may offer certain advantages over Xorg, such as improved performance or greater security. Second, you're implying that because Wayland is a newer display server, it lacks the software support that Xorg has. This is not the case, as many popular Linux applications and desktop environments now support Wayland (Firefox, GNOME, Gimp, LibreOffice) and more are being added all the time. Third, you're suggesting that Wayland is built on top of Xorg and is not distinct from it. Wayland and Xorg are two different display servers, that have two completely different architectures. Also, there are many reasons why parent would want to use Wayland: it's supposedly more secure, and lighter to run.