[library] needs a structural overhaul

[jensmaurer]

The "method of description" subclause has too many deeply nested children.

Suggestions:

• Fold [conventions] away.
• Move [customization.point.object] one level up (it's not a type) and shorten the stable label.

Beyond that, I'd also favor folding away [requirements]. It mixes requirements on user programs (the now prevalent understanding of (concept) "requirement"; e.g. [utility.requirements]) with general requirements on implementations (e.g. [contents]), which are usually not called out as "requirements" in the C++ standard.

See also #2528.

[jensmaurer]

Editorial meeting: Order exposition-only functions next to private members. Exposition-only concepts are not mentioned. Consolidate exposition-only. [character.seq] does not seem to fit under "type description"; the hanging paragraph contains a lot of misplaced stuff. "C standard library"; should be moved to "terms and definitions", including subclauses. Look again post-C++20.