It isn't a dead end when WebGPU failed at all their graphics performance promises for being better than it in every way.
I was speaking more to the willingness of vendors to support. It's debatable how well WebGL(2)/WebGPU are designed and especially implemented. But it does seem like most evolutionary features, if they make it to browsers at all, would come from the WebGPU path. Not saying the reasons for that are good.
What part of WebGPU isn't meeting graphics performance? AFAICT it's only people who continue to treat it like WebGL. It's like C++ programmers complaining Rust is slow and then Rust programmers say "stop using it like C++". If you want perf in a low-level API liek WebGPU you have to work with it using patterns that fit. If you stick to your WebGL patterns then yea, your app will suck.