[temp.constr.normal] Reference to the wrong entity.

[cor3ntin]

Reference (section label): [temp.constr.normal]

This section reads

The normal form of CI is the result of substituting, in the normal form N of CE, appearances of C's template parameters in the parameter mappings of the atomic constraints in N with their respective arguments from C.

However, C is "a concept-id C<A1, A2,... An> termed CI.

Therefore, this makes little sense. C has no template argument. This blunder was introduced by https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2025/p2841r7.pdf

Suggested resolution:

The normal form of CI is the result of substituting, in the normal form N of CE, appearances of C's template parameters in the parameter mappings of the atomic constraints in N with their respective arguments from CI.

(Notice the added I)

[hubert-reinterpretcast]

The proposed resolution is better than the status quo; however, I think we want to also solve the problem of what happens with the default template arguments of C (if used). The wording prior to P2841 clearly omitted (probably by mistake) any treatment of default template argument usage. The new wording seems a bit ambiguous.