Indeed. I've seen one of the authors of the open letter to the WHO explaining on Twitter what they really wanted to say and the dillemma of using technical terms vs public communication:
1) Airbone vs "opportunistic airbone":
I am one of the scientists who wrote the paper. A critical problem, described by @apoorva_nyc, is lack of nuance on "airborne."
More accurate is "opportunistic airborne", transmits well indoors under crowded, low ventilation, long duration, no masks. Avoid each of those!
2) Aerosol vs true airbone (measles)
Terminology is indeed very confusing. Most importantly, the same word is used to mean very different things by different communities.
Aerosol = nuclei = microdroplet + dry particles (particles below 30 microns or so)
Airborne = through aerosols. BUT means "like measles" to docs