[temp.expl.spec] Is p13 too limited or is it intentional?

The paragraph [temp.expl.spec] p13 says:

Whether an explicit specialization of a function or variable template is inline, constexpr, constinit, or consteval is determined by the explicit specialization and is independent of those properties of the template.
Similarly, attributes appearing in the declaration of a template have no effect on an explicit specialization of that template.

First of all, I don't like the wording, because it is not very clear that the consteval wording doesn't apply to variable templates. This should probably use "constexpr function", "inline function", "immediate function", and other clearly defined terms.

Secondly, "constexpr variable" is not defined, and this paragraph makes mention of it indirectly. See also https://github.com/cplusplus/draft/issues/6521. It should say "constexpr variable" with proper formatting, or "constexpr variable" should be defined.

Thirdly, shouldn't this paragraph apply to member templates too? How come this only applies to function templates, and not member function templates? How come this does not apply to templates of static data members?

Start with [temp.expl.spec] paragraph 13 and review the related discussion in issue #6521. Determine whether the wording should cover member templates and static data member templates, and clarify the terminology for function and variable properties. Done means the scope and terminology are resolved and the corresponding standard-draft wording is updated.