Copy captures always unnamed

[hubert-reinterpretcast]

It appears that a meta-object that reflects a copy capture reflects upon the non-static data member of the closure type. This means that the copy capture is unnamed.

[camio]

AN: If the meta-object reflects a capture, it satisfies LambdaCapture. That
offers certain operations; I don't see why those are equivalent to "reflects
upon the non-static data member of the closure type".

AN: Even if it were this looks more like a design issue that needs to be
handled outside this editorial review. Maybe Hubert could explain to me where
the current wording fails to do what we intended, and then we make this an
issue on the TS?

[camio]

Leaving open as an issue to handle post-publication.