Correct RESP "bulk" categorization

[mgravell]

Multiple length-prefixed scalar types are incorrectly categorized as "aggregate" rather than "bulk"

---

Note

Low Risk
Documentation-only table correction with no runtime or API impact.

Overview
Corrects the RESP data-type summary table so length-prefixed scalar encodings are labeled Bulk instead of Aggregate.

The Category column now shows Bulk for bulk strings, null bulk strings, bulk errors, and verbatim strings. Arrays, maps, sets, attributes, and pushes remain Aggregate, matching the doc’s simple / bulk / aggregate taxonomy.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 24db21d. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[dwdougherty]

Hi @mgravell. Thank you for this; much appreciated! I'll go ahead and approve, but I do have one comment (from Claude, actually):

One loose end I [Claude] did not touch since it's outside the diff: line 786 of the same page uses "aggregate" informally ("Reading the length of aggregate types (for example, bulk strings or arrays)...") in a way that conflicts with the formal taxonomy the PR is enforcing. That's a pre-existing wording quirk on the page, unrelated to this PR's table fix — worth a separate look if you want the page fully self-consistent, but it's not something this PR needs to address.

Please sign the CLA; otherwise, I cannot merge your work.

[dwdougherty]

Hi @mgravell. Just another reminder that you need to sign the CLA so I can merge this PR.

[mgravell]

Sorry, didn't see the notification and was OOO. On CLA: happy to do that post-hoc, but note I'm also staff, so: it is somewhat implied by contract :)

[mgravell]

(signed; for info, the CLA bot was a hot mess and needed about 7 attempts to succeed)