Is the name of a non-static-member dependent when used within a non-static member function?

Both gcc 5.0 and clang 3.6 require the typename keyword in the following example:

template<int n>
struct I
{
    typedef int Type;
};

template<typename T>
struct A
{
    int m;

    void f()
    {
        typedef typename I<sizeof m>::Type Type; // typename required
    }
};

This is covered by the following wording in the C++11 standard:

[temp.dep.type]/8

A type is dependent if it is

• a simple-template-id in which either the template name is a template parameter or any of the template arguments is a dependent type or an expression that is type-dependent or value-dependent

So I<sizeof m> is dependent if sizeof m is value-dependent.

[temp.dep.expr]/4

Expressions of the following forms are never type-dependent (because the type of the expression cannot be dependent):

sizeof unary-expression

[temp.dep.constexpr]/2

Expressions of the following form are value-dependent if the unary-expression or expression is typedependent or the type-id is dependent:

sizeof unary-expression

So sizeof m is only dependent if m is dependent.

[expr.prim.general]/8

Within the definition of a non-static member function, an identifier that names a non-static member is transformed to a class member access expression

So m is the member in a class member access expression.

[temp.dep.type]/4

A name is a member of the current instantiation if it is

• An id-expression denoting the member in a class member access expression (5.2.5) for which the type of the object expression is the current instantiation, and the id-expression, when looked up (3.4.5), refers to at least one member of the current instantiation or a non-dependent base class thereof.

So it seems that m is a member of the current instantiation.

[temp.dep.type]/5

A name is a member of an unknown specialization if it is

• 
  

  An id-expression denoting the member in a class member access expression (5.2.5) in which either

  
  
  
  
  • 
    

    the type of the object expression is the current instantiation, the current instantiation has at least one dependent base class, and name lookup of the id-expression does not find a member of the current instantiation or a non-dependent base class thereof; or

    
    
  
  
  • 
    

    the type of the object expression is dependent and is not the current instantiation.

    
    
  
  
  
  

So m is NOT a member of an unknown specialization - it would be found by name lookup to be a member of the current instantiation.

[temp.dep.expr]/3

An id-expression is type-dependent if it contains

• an identifier associated by name lookup with one or more declarations declared with a dependent type,


• a nested-name-specifier or a qualified-id that names a member of an unknown specialization

Since m is of type int and is not a member of an unknown specialization, neither of these bullets would make the id-expression m dependent.

[temp.dep.expr]/5

A class member access expression (5.2.5) is type-dependent if the expression refers to a member of the current instantiation and the type of the referenced member is dependent, or the class member access expression refers to a member of an unknown specialization.

When m is transformed to a class member access expression, it is still not dependent because it does not refer to a member of an unknown specialization.

Should m be treated as dependent? On a related note, should this->m be treated as dependent? What about std::declval<A>().m ?

EDIT

And finally, should &A::m be dependent?