The second technical definition in this document is wrong. Great way to put the "the author is opinionated but is clueless" marker right near the top.

> Actual video coding formats are formats like H.264 (also known as AVC) or H.265 (also known as HEVC). Sometimes they're also called codecs, short for "encode, decode".

Codec is coder/decoder. It's not the format.

There's a footnote claiming people mix the 2 terms up (a video format is apparently equal to a video codec according to this "expert") but apparently acknowledging the difference is seemingly only what nitpickers do. Sheesh. If you want to educate, educate with precision, and don't spread your misinformation!

> If you want to educate, educate with precision, and don't spread your misinformation!

I would assert that the author was already being precise. A statement that X is "sometimes called" Y already conventionally carries the subtext that Y isn't actually the correct term; that Y is instead some kind of colloquial variant or corrupted layman's coinage for the more generally-agreed-upon term X.

Why mention the incorrect terminology Y at all, then?

Specifically in the case that pertains here, where far more laymen are already familiar with the Y term than the X term, giving Y as a synonym in the definition of X is a way to give people who are already familiar with this concept — but who only know it as Y — an immediate understanding of what is being discussed, by connecting their knowledge of "Y" over to the X term the author is defining. This is an extremely common practice in academic writing, especially in textbooks.