I don't read that. It's undefined, in the sense that there is imprecise legislative guidance, and case law will determine the law asymptotically. But it's best not to be the case law yourself.
> If you’re stationary in your car in a parking lot, and you turn the engine on to use the heater are you “attempt[ing] to put the motor vehicle in motion”?
Their answer was yes, for this you can risk prosecution if you do this while intoxicated.
The second example asks:
> If you pull into a parking spot, and park your car, but do not turn off the engine, are you “parked”?
Their answer was no you’re not parked and are risking prosecution if you use a phone under these circumstances.
I don’t think there’s any legal nuance to those answers. I think most people would come to the exact opposite conclusions on those two examples, and the advice in that article simply states that the police may attempt to interpret the law in whatever way allows them to prosecute you. I don’t know if there’s any solid case law to answer those ambiguities, but if there is it’s not referenced in that source. I know from experience that in many situations like this case law tends not to help in any case, and the outcome will be decided by how well you can explain yourself to a judge, which kinda just emboldens the police to pursue even the most ridiculous cases.
