The STL commonly defines an output iterator like so:
template
class insert_iterator
: public iterator
The real value type of the iterator could well be the iterator itself. operator* may easily just return a reference to *this because the real work is done by the assignment operator. You may well find that *it = x; and it = x; have exactly the same effect with output iterators (I suppose special measures might be taken to prevent the latter from compiling).
As such, defining the real value type would be just as useless. Defining it as a void, on the other hand, can prevent errors like:
typename Iter::value_type v = *it; //useless with an output iterator if it compiled
I suppose this is just the limit of the concept of output iterators: they are objects which "abuse" operator overloading, so as to appear pointerlike, whereas in reality something completely different is going on.
Your problem is interesting, though. If you want to support any container, then the output iterators in question would probably be std::insert_iterator, std::front_insert_iterator and std::back_insert_iterator. In this case you could do something like the following:
#include
#include
#include
#include
It would still only get you this far. I suppose one could take this further, so it can also manage, say, a std::ostream_iterator, but at some point it would get so complex that it takes a god to decipher the error messages, should something go wrong.