Not sure I get the gist of your idea, but I can contribute this much: the ink from inkjets tends to puddle on smooth plastic surfaces. So I am thinking that an aqueous solution will puddle up on the film. Thus you'd need a fair excess of fluid to actually coat the film. This would seem to be at odds with the inkjet design, whch uses ink as sparingly as possible.
Assuming that I understand your idea, let me make a counterproposal. You go ahead and make your exposure on film and on digital. You write a program that takes the histogram from the digital file and compares it to what you need for whatever output method you desire. Your program tunes your development accordingly.
This is a bit similar, in spirit, to capturing a raw file and then modifying it (colour temp, exposure, etc.) before it is converted to tiff or jpeg for printing. I haven't kept up with that, but I suppose raw converters are now advanced enough to allow you to curve and do HDR merges etc. The big difference between this and what I mention above is that with b&w film there is almost no limit to what you can do to rescue detail at either or at both ends of the tone scale. I mean, with R3 you can decide your ISO after you shoot.... so why not decide ISO and how long the tone scale is as well, by tuning the development.
Is this what you were talking about?