No. Just no.
I don't agree.
It's difficult for me to understand why I feel such disagreement with the suggestion. Perhaps because RACI is, by definition, a way of predefining (and often segregating) delivery/implementation from decision-making and therefore the model is a barrier to self-organization. (This is an incomplete argument, I know, but I would not support the inclusion of RACI in the Scrum Guide nor in a Scrum environment.
I can agree to this. I can't think of any negative effects of this change.
The Sprint Goal is a phrase which represents the intent of the Scrum Team for a Sprint. It is a goal to which the team and its stakeholders commit to achieving together.
Unlike the artifacts of Scrum, the Sprint Goal is not to be 'inspected' or 'adapted'. It is to be 'set' and then used as a guide for the inspection/adaption throughout the Sprint.
I'd agree that the Sprint Goal can be made transparent or known to all involved, but to formalize it as an artifact in the Scrum Guide would (for me) change the concept dramatically -- the Sprint Goal, if described as an artifact, would become procedural rather than aspirational.