I would disagree with this, typescript is transpiled to javascript because they have similar levels of abstraction, and also they have pretty much the same syntax, one implements a type system, the other doesn't, that is the major difference between the two languages. Furthermore I disagree with the argument transpilation depends on abstraction, its easier to see transpiling as one programming language to another, but then it is hard to define compilation.
If we see transpiling as a subset of compiling, all transpiling is compiling, but not all compiling is transpiling, that would make more sense. But then again this is an argument over definitions, people have different definitions for different things, and therefore there is no true right answer. This is the same argument as "Is HTML a programming language", google says yes, and other people say yes too, and a lot of devs say no (me included), different definitions, different ideas, cause different results. As for me, nim is transpiled, but it is also compiled, its easier to define a language into another programming language as transpiled, as it makes more sense, if nim went directly into bytecode I would only define it as compiled, but it is going into C, C is still used as a programming language, not an intermediate representation like LLVM, and therefore its more transpiling, which I still see as compiling.
