Changes to the standard scripts

[raulcano]

The description in the specs about the acceptable standard scripts is confusing (or wrong, depending on how it's read).
For example, the typical P2PKH script has this form:
OP_DUP OP_HASH160 <20-bytes> OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG

not this one (as written in the current specs - notice the number '20' in the script)
OP_DUP OP_HASH160 20 <20-bytes> OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG

I might be wrong, but I couldn't find a reference where such '20' or '32' is pushed before the actual hashes. Maybe it was intended for clarity?
In any case, I believe my proposal here is slightly more clear.
Reference: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script#Standard_Transaction_to_Bitcoin_address_(pay-to-pubkey-hash)

[Christewart]

Seems reasonable to me as this appears to be the convention throughout the rest of the Script ecosystem

[raulcano]

Some further clarification to my original post:

According to https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script:
"When notating scripts, data to be pushed to the stack is generally enclosed in angle brackets and data push commands are omitted. Non-bracketed words are opcodes. These examples include the “OP_” prefix, but it is permissible to omit it. Thus “ OP_2 OP_CHECKMULTISIG" may be abbreviated to " 2 CHECKMULTISIG".

So it is true that the data push opcode is part of the actual script, but not displayed in common notation. I suppose my PR still makes sense if we are to keep the scripts aligned with this notation.