Standards bodies are meant to formalize technology that already exists. Good luck getting a standards committee to innovate and come up with new features.
(BTW, IE gave us XmlHttpRequest. It was not introduced by a standards body. )
If it's open then that argument is irrelevant. MS's Embrace Extend Extinguish is only applicable for proprietary standards. Open standards are the cure for that.
If any other browser can use the exact same technology Google uses, then that's fine. That's how other technologies get adopted by browsers, too. As soon as most of them adopt one, then it usually becomes a standard.
Also, I'll give you a much worse example, that has already happened, rather than something that may happen in the future, like what you're suggesting - h.264. It "completely bypassed" the standards body as well. The standards body would've much rather used something open source and free, but since most browsers used h.264 for the video tag, and since 2 of the major browser makers, Microsoft and Apple, were unwilling to go with an open source codec, the standards body was forced to adopt h.264.
Standard bodies exist to standardlize already existing technologies so others can implement them.
And btw did you miss the experiment part of all the non-standard APIs? About the only thing that wasn't was the manifest (which is JSON) and the icons.
I'll stick to the browser made by a foundation, not a for-profit company trying to gain control over the web. I remember IE6.