Proposed resolution:

This wording is relative to N4958.

1. Modify [range.view] as indicated:

   template<class T>
     constexpr bool is-derived-from-view-interface = see below;            // exposition only
   template<class T>
     constexpr bool enable_view =
       derived_from<T, view_base> || is-derived-from-view-interface<T>;
   

   -6- For a type T, is-derived-from-view-interface<T> is true if and only if T has exactly one public base class view_interface<TU> for some type U and T has no base classes of type view_interface<UV> for any other type UV.

[ 2023-10-30; Reflector poll ]

Set status to Tentatively NAD. The wording correctly handles the case where T derives from Base which derives from view_interface<Base>. We don't want it to only be satisfied for direct inheritance from view_interface<T>, but from any specialization of view_interface. Previously the concept only checked for inheritance from view_base but it was changed when view_interface stopped inheriting from view_base.

Currently, the wording of is-derived-from-view-interface only detects whether type T is unambiguously derived from one base class view_interface<U> where U is not required to be T, which is not the intention of CRTP.