I think just adding to those points AL has made ... no matter how correct the technical explanation, if the vast majority of people use a 'loose' explanation then I have to wonder which is best to use. No point talking German if I'm in Fiji.

I think in the strictest terms 'Macro' is as you understand it ... 1:1 or closer. However, so many people call close up photography 'Macro' that it's widely accepted that way. This brings in terms like 'True Macro' which acknowledge 'Macro' as being less than 1:1 ... not correct but accepted by many. You'll spend the rest of your life trying to correct people on this so most don't bother.

As AL said ... on Lenses ... if you have a crop body you simply multiply the focal length by the crop factor (1.6 for Canon, 1.5 for Nikon) so your 400mm does indeed become 600mm. How you should express that is again ... usually not done correctly. Most people in your case would say they shot it at 400mm when they should either say it was 600mm OR 400mm with a crop factor of 1.5 or 1.6 etc.

Although most camera terms are universal not all software terms are. But most seem to try to use the same terms these days.
Tone Mapping, for instance, comes from HDR work and refers to the combination of several images for HDR that are very high bit, beyond what your monitor can display properly, so they look like crap. Tone Mapping then is the process that allows you to blend the tones and colours down to a level you can see properly on your monitor.

Shadow luminence and other similar terms I think are results of software now being able to further dissect an images digital elements and process them. Whereas before you might just have adjusted overall luminence, you can now divide that task into highlights, shadows, specific colour ranges etc.

And it's a 'Bonnet' ... a 'Hood' is a head cover connected to a garment of clothing, or a slang word for Neighbourhood!