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 
});
      itRenders('a div with multiple children', async render => {
        const e = await render(
          <div id="parent"><div id="child1" /><div id="child2" /></div>,
        );
        expect(e.id).toBe('parent');
        expect(e.childNodes.length).toBe(2);
        expect(e.childNodes[0].id).toBe('child1');
        expect(e.childNodes[0].childNodes.length).toBe(0);
        expect(e.childNodes[1].id).toBe('child2');
        expect(e.childNodes[1].childNodes.length).toBe(0);
      });
      itRenders(
        'a div with multiple children separated by whitespace',
        async render => {
          const e = await render(
            <div id="parent"><div id="child1" /> <div id="child2" /></div>,
          );
          expect(e.id).toBe('parent');
          let child1, child2, textNode;
          if (ReactDOMFeatureFlags.useFiber) {
            
            
            expect(e.childNodes.length).toBe(3);
            child1 = e.childNodes[0];
            textNode = e.childNodes[1];
            child2 = e.childNodes[2];
          } else {