The issue is confused because of Javascript and the trend to consider Javascript "bytecode for the web" because it is primarily "compiled" from other languages, rather than being considered a language in its own right.
I've gotten into arguments with people who refuse to accept that there is any difference worth considering between javascript and bytecode or assembly. From that perspective, the difference between a "transpiler" and a "compiler" is just aesthetics.
I do think you are right, the concept is not common outside of the JS ecosystem to be fair. Indeed, it probably wouldn't make much sense to transpile in the first place, if it wasn't for these browser limitations. People would just make fully new languages, and it is starting to happen with WebAssembly.
And the ecosystem of JVM and BEAM hosted languages does make the concept even murkier.
I've gotten into arguments with people who refuse to accept that there is any difference worth considering between javascript and bytecode or assembly. From that perspective, the difference between a "transpiler" and a "compiler" is just aesthetics.