To be fair, while I do agree with you, sha-2 512/256 is an especially confusingly named hash. A _lot_ of people naturally read it as sha-2 512 or 256, which it is not, but thing/otherthing is a common enough pattern that the confusion is understandable.

sha-2 256t or something would be much clearer. As the article notes, changing it now is not trivial, but given the potential for confusion is something that might be worth doing, none the less.