pg_xlog -> pg_xjournal?

While anyone who is familiar with postgres would never do something as
stupid as to delete pg_xlog,
according to Google, there appears to be a fair amount of end-users out
there having made the irrevocable mistake of deleting the precious
directory,
a decision made on the assumption that since "it has *log* in the name so
it must be unimportant" (http://stackoverflow
.com/questions/12897429/what-does-pg-resetxlog-do-and-how-does-it-work).

If we could turn back time, would we have picked "pg_xlog" as the most
optimal name for this important directory, or would we have come up with a
more user-friendly name?

Personally, I have never had any problems with pg_xlog, but I realize there
are quite a few unlucky new users who end up in trouble.

My suggestion is to use "pg_xjournal" instead of "pg_xlog" when new users
create a new data directory using initdb, and allow for both directories to
exist (exclusive or, i.e. either one or the other, but not both). That way
we don't complicate the life for any existing users, all their tools will
continue to work who rely on pg_xlog to be named pg_xlog, but only force
new users to do a bit of googling when they can't use whatever tool that
can't find pg_xlog. When they find out it's an important directory, they
can simply create a symlink and their old not yet updated tool will work
again.

Thoughts?