On Mon Aug 21 01:51:38 2017, muks wrote:
> Don't introduce the RSA256 and RSA512 mnemonics as 256 and 512 are
> associated with SHA-2 family of hash functions and are confusing with
> just RSA.

Fair point. My thought was, even though there's no standards support for
abbreviations, it would improve usability with the longer and harder-to-
remember algorithm names, but you're right those are ambiguous and should
go. I've pushed that change now.

Are you okay with ECDSA256 and ECDSA384, though? I find the full expansions
of those algorithms almost impossible to remember and usually have to look
them up and then cut and paste.  But if you object I'll remove the abbreviations
for those as well.