Rationale (April, 2006):

The CWG felt that the wording was already clear enough.

The discussion in of the use of typename with a qualified-id in a template parameter-declaration in 13.3 [temp.names] paragraph 2 is confusing:

typename followed by an unqualified-id names a template type parameter. typename followed by a qualified-id denotes the type in a non-type parameter-declaration.

This rule would be clearer if the unqualified-id case were described in terms of resolving the ambiguity of declaring a template parameter name versus referring to a type-name from the enclosing scope, and if the qualified-id case referred to the use of the typename keyword with dependent types in 13.8 [temp.res]. An example would also be helpful.