[dcl.type.decltype] p1 What is the entity named by E when E is a class member access

[dcl.type.decltype] p1.3 states:

For an expression E, the type denoted by decltype(E) is defined as follows:

• [...]
• otherwise, if E is an unparenthesized id-expression or an unparenthesized class member access ([expr.ref]), decltype(E) is the type of the entity named by E. If there is no such entity, the program is ill-formed;

This sentence is obscure and subtle when E is a class member access. Consider this example:

struct C{
  int v;
};
C const obj{};  
decltype(obj.v) i;  // the type of i is `int` rather than `const int`. 
i = 0; // ok

We seem to never clearly specify what the entity named by a class member access is. [basic.pre] p3 just states that:

An entity is a value, object, reference, structured binding, function, enumerator, type, class member, bit-field, template, template specialization, namespace, or pack.

In this case, we can say the class member access E names the subobject associated with C::v or just names the class member C::v, they all be called entity. They have a huge different type due to the type of object expression(int vs. int const). It is not clear which is the correct interpretation, at least we never explicitly specify them in [expr.ref].

[expr.ref] p6 just specifies that

If E2 is a non-static data member..., the expression designates the corresponding member subobject of the object designated by the first expression.

Since [dcl.type.decltype] p1.3 references [expr.ref], we should clearly specify what the entity named by E1.E2 is, in [expr.ref].

Moreover, denote/named/designate should be explicitly defined if using them with the concrete component would have a different meaning.

Start with [dcl.type.decltype] p1.3, [expr.ref] p6, and [basic.pre] p3, then work through the provided C++ example involving C::v and obj.v. Determine how the entity named by a class member access should be specified and whether denote, named, and designate need explicit definitions. Done means the relevant standard wording removes the ambiguity without changing the intended decltype behavior.