No, the point in the redesign of the protocol would be to eliminate the need for a 'USB condom'.
A data channel isn't a data channel. USB is designed to be widely used by many industries, as such the standard has provisions for many use-cases. A battery data channel is only for the charging equipment to communicate with the battery's chipset a limited amount of parameters. The data being transferred is incredibly limited, and can thus be sanitized easier when compared to USB.
A protocol designed in such a way would also be easier to test, as the scope of vulnerabilities would be much more limited than a general purpose data channel.
Regardless, it was merely a possible answer to
> If you disconnect the data pins, how can any device (apple or anyone else) get more?"
and really wasn't meant to be a valid product or concept. Just a fleeting thought.