So in answer to your question: As far as I know, it is a correct definition of "semi-pelagiansim," but I am not satisfied with that as a "category" in this discussion.
The whole problem is that the tradition-bound theologians have made a category error. They write as if "human nature" changed with the fall. This is an error common to both sides of the debate; Semi-Pelagianism and Augustinianism (aka Calvinism) alike.
They are both wrong, because they are not using the biblical categories of Flesh vs. Spirit. They invent a "substance" called "human nature" and then proceed to apply this idea in the complex algebra of their philosophic theology.
They got it wrong from the get go. Beware of the phlogiston of the philosophical theologians.