In the Wikipedia article on vector calculus identities, we have the following
$$\oint_{\partial S} \psi \; d\mathbf{\ell} = \iint_S (\hat{\mathbf{n}} \times \nabla \psi) \; dS$$
The right hand side is an integral of a vector field over a surface integral against $dS$, and not $\cdot dS$ or $\cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}} \; dS$. So if it's not a flux integral, I don't know what this means.
I don't think the right hand side is the flux integral of $\mathbf{\hat{n}} \times \nabla \psi$. Otherwise, by Stokes' theorem, this would equal $$-\int_{\partial S} \psi \mathbf{\hat{n}} \; \cdot d\ell = 0$$ since the normal vector is normal to the tangent vector on the boundary. Then the identity is false.
So what is this called? The only way I know how to integrate a vector field along a surface it by its flux, but this clearly is not what this is. I haven't seen this notation anywhere else, does anyone know where I can find a precise, rigorous definition of what it's supposed to mean?
EDIT: Here is my guess. These are vector valued integrals. The left hand side is $$\oint_{\partial S} \psi \; \mathbf{d\ell}$$ What this means is the vector $$\left(\int_{\partial S} (\psi, 0, 0) \cdot d\ell, \int_{\partial S} (0, \psi, 0) \cdot d\ell, \int_{\partial S} (0, 0, \psi) \cdot d\ell \right)$$ where the integrals are the usual line integrals of vector fields along $\partial S$.
The right hand side is $$\iint_S (\hat{\mathbf{n}} \times \nabla \psi) \; dS$$ Observe that $\hat{\mathbf{n}} \times \nabla \psi$ gives a vector that can be written as $$(\mathbf{G}_1 \cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}}, \mathbf{G}_2 \cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}}, \mathbf{G}_3 \cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}})$$ for some vector fields $\mathbf{G}_i$, $1 \leq i \leq 3$. The right hand side is thus the vector $$\left(\int_S \mathbf{G}_1 \cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}} \; dS, \int_S \mathbf{G}_2 \cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}} \; dS, \int_S \mathbf{G}_3 \cdot \mathbf{\hat{n}} \; dS\right)$$ where the components are the flux integrals of the $\mathbf{G}_i$.
Still not sure what the $dS$ is supposed to be, since it seems a bit useless?
EDIT 2:
I think I understand now, the integral of a vector valued function is just the integral of the component functions with respect to the volume form of what we are integrating over ($dS$ or $d\ell$). So there are two ways to integrate a vector field over a surface. One, is to take the usual flux integral, which yields a scalar. The second, which is presented here, is the integrals of the component functions over the surface, which yields a vector. Funnily enough, I've never seen this in any of my math books...perhaps it's more common in physics?