That's how it is, and I'd like to ask everyone to refrain from drawing this particular flamewar out any further.
The result is that anyone doing low-level graphics on Linux would have to support two entirely separate, very complex APIs - one for everyone but nvidia, and then one for the proprietary nvidia drivers. Unsurprisingly, not many people are up for that.
Realistically, nvidia just don’t care about Linux outside of very specific use cases where they’re working with the system integrators directly, the same as Broadcom and a few others. If you’re building a Linux system without their support, you’d be well advised to stick with GPU developers that actually work with Linux developers.
Nvidia refuses to support GBM, a standard way of allocating memory for graphics. Either they refuse this out of spite, or (more likely) because it fundamentally doesn't fit the architecture of their closed source driver. They are so desperate to push their alternative, EGLStreams, that they have lobbied Gnome and even created patches for KDE to be able to run Wayland on these DEs. This is not some closed source vs open source thing, since AFAICT the closed source Mali driver seems to support GBM and Wayland implementations that need it.
Therefore, the problem isn't that Sway doesn't support Nvidia. The problem is that that Nvidia doesn't support the standard ways to do graphics on Linux. This something Nvidia can in principle remediate themselves if they want it enough.
Whereas before installing nvidia proprietary drivers was just a nuisance, now I am looking for alternative GPUs as I use Linux on all my machines.
I'd love for this situation to change, but until then, i'm on i3-gaps and happy.