So, I believe that this side discussion is fundamentally about a disagreement over the definition of "existential".
IIUC, your definition of "existential" is similar to:
a value of an existential of protocol
Pis a valuevfor which there exists a typeT, such thatvis of typeTandTconforms toP.
Under this definition the value boxed in any P and both possible extensions of some P are existentials.
However, IIUC the definition of "existential" in general use in the Swift community is similar to:
a value of an existential of protocol
Pis a valuebwhich contains a valuevfor which there exists a typeT, such thatvis of typeTandTconforms toP, andbcontains proofs of those statements aboutv.
Under this definition, any P, but not the value boxed in it, is an existential, but some P is not, because the proofs for some P are not stored in the value, but in the context.