Consistently refer to them as "human-readable names", not addresses

It seems confusing to call BIP 353 names "addresses", and most of
the BIP refers to them as "names", but a few "human-readable
addresses" snuck in in a recent change, which are fixed here.

Author: TheBlueMatt

bip-0353.mediawiki

@@ -70,9 +70,9 @@ Payment instructions which do contain on-chain addresses which will be re-used S
 
 === Display ===
 
-When displaying a verified human-readable address, wallets SHOULD prefix it with ₿, i.e. ₿`user`@`domain`. They SHOULD parse recipient information in both `user`@`domain` and ₿`user`@`domain` forms and resolve such entry into recipient information using the above record. For the avoidance of doubt, the ₿ is *not* included in the DNS label which is resolved.
+When displaying a verified human-readable name, wallets SHOULD prefix it with ₿, i.e. ₿`user`@`domain`. They SHOULD parse recipient information in both `user`@`domain` and ₿`user`@`domain` forms and resolve such an entry into recipient information using the above record. For the avoidance of doubt, the ₿ is *not* included in the DNS label which is resolved.
 
-Wallets providing the ability for users to "copy" their address information SHOULD copy the underlying URI directly, rather than the human-readable address. This avoids an additional DNS lookup by the application in which it is pasted. Wallets that nevertheless provide users the ability to copy their human-readable address, MUST include the ₿ prefix (i.e. copy it in the form ₿`user`@`domain`).
+Wallets providing the ability for users to "copy" their address information SHOULD copy the underlying URI directly, rather than the human-readable name. This avoids an additional DNS lookup by the application in which it is pasted. Wallets that nevertheless provide users the ability to copy their human-readable name, MUST include the ₿ prefix (i.e. copy it in the form ₿`user`@`domain`).
 
 Wallets accepting payment information from external devices (e.g. hardware wallets) SHOULD accept RFC 9102-formatted proofs (as a series of unsorted `AuthenticationChain` records) and, if verification succeeds, SHOULD display the recipient in the form ₿`user`@`domain`.