With the checkin of #10362, the code to render to a stream now looks like:

```
import { renderToStream } from 'react-dom/server'

renderToStream(<div>some text</div>).pipe(response);
```

This is great! I am, however, a little concerned about taking the word "node" out of the mix, because I'm thinking that we may eventually want to render to [**browser** streams](https://www.w3.org/TR/streams-api/), which are a really neat feature that can be used in concert with "service-worker-side rendering". I would propose renaming `renderToStream` to `renderToNodeStream` and `renderToStaticStream` to `renderToStaticNodeStream`.  This would give room for `renderToBrowserStream` in the future.

If I make a PR on this, would it have a chance of being accepted? 

cc @gaearon & @sebmarkbage 
const Component = props => <div>{props.children}</div>;
        const e = await render(
          <Component>
            <Component>
              <Component /><Component />
            </Component>
            <Component>
              <Component /><Component />
            </Component>
          </Component>,
        );
        expect(e.tagName).toBe('DIV');
        expect(e.childNodes.length).toBe(2);
        for (var i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
          var child = e.childNodes[i];
          expect(child.tagName).toBe('DIV');
          expect(child.childNodes.length).toBe(2);
          for (var j = 0; j < 2; j++) {
            var grandchild = child.childNodes[j];
            expect(grandchild.tagName).toBe('DIV');
            expect(grandchild.childNodes.length).toBe(0);
          }
        }
      });
      itRenders('a div with a child', async render => {
        const e = await render(<div id="parent"><div id="child" /></div>);
        expect(e.id).toBe('parent');
        expect(e.childNodes.length).toBe(1);
        expect(e.childNodes[0].id).toBe('child');
        expect(e.childNodes[0].childNodes.length).toBe(0);