Suggested resolution:

1. Change in 12.5 [over.built] paragraph 10 as follows:

   For every pair of types L and R , where each of L and R is a cv-unqualified floating-point or promoted integral type, there exist candidate operator functions of the form ...

2. Change in 12.5 [over.built] paragraph 11 as follows:

   For every cv-unqualified integral type T there exists a candidate operator function of the form ...

3. Change in 12.5 [over.built] paragraph 12 as follows:

   For every pair of cv-unqualified floating-point types L and R, there exists a candidate operator function of the form ...

4. Change in 12.5 [over.built] paragraph 18 as follows:

   For every triple (L , vq, R ), where L is an arithmetic type, and R is a cv-unqualified floating-point or promoted integral type, there exist candidate operator functions of the form ...

5. Change in 12.5 [over.built] paragraph 22 as follows:

   For every triple (L , vq, R ), where L is an cv-unqualified integral type, and R is a promoted integral type, there exist candidate operator functions of the form ...

6. Change in 12.5 [over.built] paragraph 24 as follows:

   For every pair of types L and R , where each of L and R is a cv-unqualified floating-point or promoted integral type, there exist candidate operator functions of the form ...

(From submission #800.)

Subclause 12.5 [over.built] is inconsistent in its inclusion or exclusion of cv-qualified types and permits them even where the parameter-type-list is not affected.