Why is node_handle a large-scale placeholder anyway? All other type requirements are phrased as tables (ok, also sub-optimal) instead of showing a pseudo class synopsis.

In my understanding, "node_handle" is an exposition-only class, but it's still an actual class, hence class name capitalization. By contrast, the capital-italics INSERT_RETURN_TYPE is a placeholder for something that we fill in later (like EXPLICIT).

So it's exposition-only vs placeholders. I think that's not too bad.

Editorial meeting consensus: Use lowercase italics teletype with hyphens, not underscores, for exposition-only types (cf. signal-handler) to clarify they are not standard-blessed names. (This is unclear for node_handle.) Apply this convention to all exposition-only types where a C++-level definition is shown in the standard such as INSERT_RETURN_TYPE or call_wrapper.

Retain all-uppercase italic teletype for INVOKE and GENERALIZED_NONCOMMUTATIVE_SUM, which are sort-of macros at the standard level, and don't directly represent source constructs.

node_handle is definitely not a standard-blessed name, so using node-handle for that makes sense.